BodyBoard of Supervisors
MeetingRegular Meeting
Date📅 May 5, 2020

UnGovr Transcript

iHow this transcript is madeUnGovr transcribes the official recording with automated speech-to-text, separates speakers by voice, and matches voices to the seated roster. Names and attributions are AI estimates and may contain errors.Verify any quote yourself: click anywhere in the transcript and the official video jumps to that exact moment, so you can check any quote against the recording.
  1. PendingQueued for transcription.
  2. AIYou are hereAuto-transcribed and summarized; not yet human-verified.
  3. VerifiedReviewed and corrected by a person.

0:00 – 0:011 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed0:13 · ≈ 9:00 AM

Music Music playing Yeah.

0:03 – 0:1124 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:39 · ≈ 9:03 AM

I will call to order the May 5th, 2020 meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. Will the clerk please call the roll?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:46 · ≈ 9:03 AM

Mr. Williams? Here. Ms. Hartman? Here! Mr. Adams? Is Mr. Adams here? Thank you. And Mr. Lavinino?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed4:01 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Here.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed4:01 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Chair Hart?

Pledge of Allegianceceremonial · click to expand
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:02 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Here At this time would you please stand and join me in pledging allegiance to the flag

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed4:14 · ≈ 9:04 AM

The next item of business is the approval of the minutes of April 21st, 2020 meeting. Is there any discussion? Is there a motion to approve the minutes? Move approval.

not transcribed≈10s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:43 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Motion's been made, is there a second? And seconded. Would the clerk please call the roll?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed4:48 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Mr. Williams? Aye. Ms. Hartman? Aye. Mr. Adam? Aye Mr. Lavinino?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.804:54 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed4:56 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Chair Hart?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed4:57 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed4:58 · ≈ 9:04 AM

Motion passes unanimously

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed5:00 · ≈ 9:05 AM

CEO Miyasato, is there a CEO report today?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed5:03 · ≈ 9:05 AM

Yes, there is Chair and Supervisors. I'm pleased to share with the Board that our Public Works Director Scott McGulpin has been installed as President of the National Association of County Engineers or NACE and his term will run through April 2021. NACE, as some of you know, is a non-profit, nonpartisan professional association representing county road officials and related professionals in the U.S. and Canada In the U.S., local roads account for about 75% of highways and roads, equivalent to about 3 million miles. As President, Scott will be engaging with state and federal policy makers and stakeholders to ensure county road infrastructure receives attention needed to provide our nation—and especially Santa Barbara County—with a safe, reliable transportation network.

Scott has been with the county since 1998 and serves, has served as our Public Works Director since 2007. And Scott if you could come to this chair over here and want to say a few words?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:00 · ≈ 9:06 AM

Congratulations Mr. McAulpin that is a really well deserved recognition for a lifetime career supporting local streets and roads.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed6:08 · ≈ 9:06 AM

Mr. Chair thank you very much board members thank you it's an honor to represent the County of Santa Barbara at the national level and I look forward to making all of you very proud so thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed6:19 · ≈ 9:06 AM

Thank you, this is a really interesting time with all the discussion about potential infrastructure legislation. You're in a great leadership position to help. Supervisor Williams? Well, I was going to

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role6:29 · ≈ 9:06 AM

say though streets and roads might be as bread and butter. And since you worked for many years for SB CAG of course that's what you think of. But public works man it's so much more these days they are front and center the department front and center in the fight against climate change. They have to somehow make sure that we can dispose of our waste without any more room to do so. And they really have Don Yeoman's work to protect us during the fire and flood. And in its aftermaths of both fires, to make sure that our flood control system remains within capacity and we don't get exposed to danger. So Yeoman's work from you and your team and really appreciate it from the people of the first district. Thank you Supervisor Williams. Supervisor Hartner?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.867:32 · ≈ 9:07 AM

Yes, I just wanted to add that I hadn't anticipated but the most calls like yet as a supervisor have to do with roads and sidewalks and bike lanes. And yours is a most responsive department and you do us proud and congratulations it's an honor for us all.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed7:53 · ≈ 9:07 AM

Supervisor Adams or Lavinia?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.807:57 · ≈ 9:07 AM

Thank you Mr. Chair, and I think all of us have probably gone on trips to Washington DC to lobby our national leaders. And I can tell you that you're in good hands with Scott McGaulpin because he's so well connected, knows not just the elected officials to go to. We all know we need to go talk to our congressmen or our senators. Scott knows the people behind the scenes, his many years of working at BEAT has put him in touch with I guess the real decision makers and the people that make the decisions behind the scenes. And Scott will lead you down into a basement, and you end up finding somebody that actually knows how to get the job done. So always appreciated my relationship with Scott not to mention One of the most responsive department heads that we have, if not the most responsive.

Anytime I fire off an email, I get an answer immediately and it's a real help to our constituents. Also want to point out that while today we're talking about Scott, many of our department heads have taken leadership roles at the state level or national level and The quality of the professional leadership that we have in this county, that other counties throughout the state and throughout the country look to Santa Barbara County for leadership both at the state and national level. So hats off to Scott and all of our department heads.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed9:24 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Thank you Supervisor Leaveny. Now Supervisor Adam?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed9:28 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Congratulations Scott.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed9:30 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Thank you. Madam Clerk are there any announcements or changes to our agenda today?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed9:35 · ≈ 9:09 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, I just have a couple quick announcements this morning. I would like to remind members of the public we have alternative methods of participation in our board meetings as stated on our agenda on page two, we have three options for participating in our board meetings. The public can submit public comment letters emails to the SBCOB at countyofsb.org email address, and if members of the public would like that read into the record we are requesting that those requests come in prior to five the day prior to our hearings. Additionally, we have public participation by phone and that should be scrolling on top of your screen, and if you please call 805 Additionally, we did receive a withdrawal memo.

From the Planning and Development Department regarding departmental item number seven on our agenda today. This is a hearing from planning development to consider recommendations regarding Santa Rita Valley Ag Inc, Cannabis Cultivation Appeal case number 19 APL 32. And this is in the third district. And, uh, this has been posted online and as well been distributed to the board and we will address this request when we get to the department item number seven.

not transcribed≈22s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

0:11 – 0:1336 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed11:10 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Thank you madam clerk.

The next item is approval of the administrative agenda. Do any board members request to pull any items on the administrative

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8611:18 · ≈ 9:11 AM

agenda? Uh,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed11:22 · ≈ 9:11 AM

A7. Any requests to pull in Santa Maria?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed11:27 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Yeah. A two and a three, please.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed11:30 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Thank you. Would the clerk please read item a two into the record?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed11:37 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board department or administrative item number two is from Supervisor Hart. It is to adopt a resolution proclaiming the month of May 2020 as Water Awareness Month in Santa Barbara County.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed11:50 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Supervisor Adam.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed11:53 · ≈ 9:11 AM

Well, I just take offense at the sentence in there about recurring droughts in Santa Barbara County are more likely with the impacts of climate change. So I'm just going to abstain on this.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed12:06 · ≈ 9:12 AM

OK, thank you. I guess we'll just take this item separately. Is there a motion to approve this item?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8612:14 · ≈ 9:12 AM

So moved.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed12:16 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Motion's been made. Is there a second? Second. Roll call please.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed12:23 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Mr. Williams? Aye. Ms. Hartman? Aye. Mr. Adam?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed12:29 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Abstain.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed12:30 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Mr. Lavinino?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed12:32 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed12:33 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Chair Hart?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed12:34 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed12:34 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Motion passes four with one abstention.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed12:37 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Thank you, will the clerk please read item A3 into the record?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed12:41 · ≈ 9:12 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board administrative item number three is from Supervisor Hart and Supervisor Hartman it is to adopt a resolution recognizing the critical work of the 805 undocu fund

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed12:54 · ≈ 9:12 AM

I

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed12:54 · ≈ 9:12 AM

just need a roll call vote. Okay,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed12:57 · ≈ 9:12 AM

is there any comments to this item or motion?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8613:02 · ≈ 9:13 AM

I Just would like to commend all of those who are involved in this essential workers who are providing our food and Need support from our community

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed13:13 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Thank You supervisor Hartman is there a motion to approve this item

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed13:16 · ≈ 9:13 AM

so move

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed13:17 · ≈ 9:13 AM

second motions been made and seconded roll call please

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed13:20 · ≈ 9:13 AM

mr. Williams

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed13:21 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Aye.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed13:22 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Ms Hartman? Aye. Mr Adam?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed13:25 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Abstain.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed13:26 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Mr Lavinino?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed13:28 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Aye.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed13:29 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Chair Hart? Aye Motion passes 4 to 1 abstention.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed13:33 · ≈ 9:13 AM

And then item A7

0:13 – 0:1515 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed13:37 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Chair Hart, members of the board. Administrative item number seven is from community services. It is to consider recommendations regarding the acceptance of COVID-19 relief funding for county arts and culture nonprofit organizations. And there is a forfeits vote required on this item.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed13:52 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Supervisor Hartman? Thank you. I think your microphone...

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8613:56 · ≈ 9:13 AM

Wanted to acknowledge the Santa Barbara Foundation and maybe ask Sarah to just say a little bit about this or the process.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 8Proposed14:14 · ≈ 9:14 AM

And this is a process where we're extremely grateful for the Santa Barbara Foundation's leadership and financial support. And this funding would not be coming from their COVID relief, but from their general endowment to match with the Bowles Art Subsidy Fund which is $50,000 from fiscal year 2019 for the art subsidy. And the Arts Commission, we make sure there's a commissioner from every district to oversee a relief grant to arts and culture nonprofits for general operating support throughout the county.

And this will be in two phases because we're also hoping for more NEA relief funds to disperse coming down the line too. And we're just incredibly excited to provide some support just to help the folks keep their doors open so that they can be open still when things are allowed.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8615:09 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Thank you, these are critical organizations and again, we all appreciate Santa Barbara Foundation for helping in this way.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed15:17 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Thank you for sharing the good news. Do we need a separate roll call for this item? I don't think so. Is everyone okay? Yeah, let's have a motion to approve the balance of the administrative agenda.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8615:29 · ≈ 9:15 AM

So moved. Second.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed15:31 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Motion has been made and seconded. Any discussion? All those or excuse me Madam Clerk could you please call the roll?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed15:39 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Mr. Williams?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed15:40 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Aye.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed15:41 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Ms. Hartman? Aye. Mr. Adam?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8015:44 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed15:48 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Aye.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed15:49 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Chair Hart? Aye. Motion passes unanimously.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed15:52 · ≈ 9:15 AM

Now is the time for members of the public to speak on items that are not on the agenda. Are there any requests to speak at this time?

0:16 – 0:226 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed16:02 · ≈ 9:16 AM

Yes, Chair Hart and members of the board we have excuse me 13 requests to speak on general public comment today and we are going to begin on the phone with Deborah Bee to be followed by a letter to be read into the record

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 9Proposed17:13 · ≈ 9:17 AM

This ordinance revised and amended significant sections of the county telecommunications code in favor of the telecommunications industry. This ordinance removed the protection to residents from 5G radiation by allowing small cell wireless facilities in all zones including residential. The same ordinance also deletes the section that puts the burden of proof on telecommunication providers to show a significant gap in coverage. The very need for the facilities themselves.

It is truly time that this culture of greed reverts back to a culture of needs. In addition, I understand there was also the removal of a planning commission permitting process for any small cell facilities. On behalf of the residents of Oregon and Santa Barbara County I can attest that no one wants to be blasted 24-7 by 5G radiation from a small tower in front of their home. We therefore ask that you impose a moratorium on small cells and other wireless infrastructure permit processes and deployment until the COVID-19 emergency is over. Please see the additional documentation submitted. We request getting on your agenda and meeting with your attorneys to collaborate and write the moratorium, and to modify County Ordinances 5093-5094 5095 and resolution 19-319 passed December 10th, 2019.

We look forward to revising amending the Santa Barbara County Code in favor of the residents of this county into a bright future that involves smart planning and those possibilities of fiber optics. Only then can we move forward as one county, one future. Thank you very much for your time.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed18:55 · ≈ 9:18 AM

We will now go to a letter written by Mariah Clegg. In this time of crisis surrounding the coronavirus pandemic, it is unsurprising that the prisoners of Lompoc Federal Prison are witnessing the most extreme miscarriages of public responsibility in the county. As leaders of our county community we implore you to stand as our allies to advocate for the basic human rights of prisoners in Lompoc.

We ask for your help in working with the Santa Barbara Public Health Department to create a health equity task force, to hire a cultural competency director and to outfit prisoners and prison personnel with adequate personal protective equipment and hand sanitizer. We ask for your help in working with the warden of Lompoc to ensure that prison personnel who are displaying symptoms of COVID stay home until they are well and to waive fees for phone calls. We asked for your help in lobbying for the release of prisoners Who are medically fragile, elders, non-violent and minor offenders. Adherents and advocates of the agreement to end hostilities and anyone within a year or two years of their release date. We ask for your help in advocating for expedited parole hearings and a reduction of jail admissions through the redirection of people to community based mental health and substance abuse treatment services.

These are just a few of the changes we hope we can count on you to implement. We look forward to future conversations wherein we can work together to end the moral crisis of mass incarceration in our county. Take care, Mariah Clay.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed20:29 · ≈ 9:20 AM

Thank you Ms. Clay.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed20:32 · ≈ 9:20 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, we will now go to the phone for Anne O'Dell Thomas.

CommentAnne O'dell ThomasProposedself-stated20:40 · ≈ 9:20 AM

Good morning my name is Anne O'dell Thomas. In June of 2016, former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced that 5G technology could generate tens of billions of dollars to benefit the U.S. telecom industry. He set the stage for complete disregard of standards and regulations for the deployment of wireless technology. Fast forward to 2020. Wireless industry operates with little or no oversight causing negative consequences environment, privacy and economy. Residents living near small and large cell towers experience debilitating health effects from the increased radiation and property values drop by at least 20%.

5G technology comes with increased surveillance and lack of personal privacy and freedom. We have the chance to be leaders in the field of communication in Santa Barbara and doing it in a way that will not harm our community, especially the ones most at risk including children and elderly people. I urge the Board of Supervisors to create an immediate moratorium on all installations of large or small cell wired infrastructure and to work towards a protective ordinance If there is a gap in coverage, only phase-wired internet infrastructure should be allowed.

We request oversight of planning departments and commissions to halt approval of all applications and contracts for small and large facility wireless installation. We request getting on your agenda and meeting with our attorneys to collaborate to write the moratorium and modify County Ordinances 1593-1594

not transcribed≈13s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

0:22 – 0:286 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed22:49 · ≈ 9:22 AM

We will now go to public comment from Leslie Weinstock. You take an oath of office to protect the community, which includes our right to be safe from physical and mental injury, to enjoy a safe and clean environment, and to be free from government and corporate surveillance. 4G, 5G multiplies the amount of radiation we are exposed to by 10 to 100,000 times and is a threat to our health, safety, well-being, privacy and choice.

Peer reviewed studies link RF radiation to cancer, DNA damage, headaches, insomnia, fatigue. Cognitive impairment, depression and anxiety. Switzerland, Italy, France, Israel, Russia and China have set RF exposure limits 100 to 10,000 times less than the US. 4G, 5G adds huge financial cost to the county and creates multi-billion dollar financial gain to the telecom industry.

New wireless facilities are unnecessary and harmful. The simple solution? Fiber optic directly to our homes and offices. It's faster, more reliable, less susceptible to hacking with no health risks. We urge you to create an immediate moratorium on all wireless installations and create a protective ordinance. If there is a gap in coverage only safe wired internet infrastructure should be allowed. With strict oversight of the planning departments and commissions to halt approval of all applications and contracts for wireless installations.

We request to get on your agenda, and meet with your attorney and our attorneys to collaborate to write the moratorium and modify county ordinances 5093-5094-5095 and resolution 19-319 passed December 10th 2019. And this is from Leslie Weinstock, Physician Assistant.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed24:43 · ≈ 9:24 AM

Thank you Ms. Weinstock.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed24:46 · ≈ 9:24 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board we will now go to the phone with Miriam Lindbeck.

CommentMiriam LindbeckProposed24:58 · ≈ 9:24 AM

Good morning supervisors. This is Miriam Lindbeck from Santa Barbara and I request this letter be read into public record. I am the co-chair of 5GFreeSantaBarbara.org We urge you to collaborate with 5G Free Santa Barbara and your residents in the county on the drafting of a new and revised wireless communications ordinance, and to install an immediate moratorium on all wireless installations until number one, you have completed your due diligence on the untested for safety and known harms of radio frequency microwave radiation. And number two are informed of your options in both legal and technical 5G3 Santa Barbara has the science technology policy legal and medical information that you need to make truly informed decisions That could make this county a model for the rest of the state and quite critically would uphold your oath of office.

We request to be put on your agenda, to meet with your attorney and our legal team in a spirit of collaboration to draft the moratorium and modify County Ordinances 5093, 5094, 5095 and Resolution 19-319 passed December 10th 2019. We request a response within the next business day respectfully yours. Thank you, Miriam.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed26:40 · ≈ 9:26 AM

Thank you Miss Lindbeck.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed26:43 · ≈ 9:26 AM

We will now go to public comment from Jason Lehman DC Circuit Court ruling 18-229 renders all applications for the state of California incomplete. It vacates FC order 18-30, deregulation of SWTFs remanded to FCC. FCC failed to justify its determination that it is not in the public interest to require review of deployments. FCC did not adequately address the harms of deregulation.

FCC did not justify its portrayal of those harms as negligible. I have a tower one block from where I live. I have 13,000 millivolts measured in my studio. I have headaches, pain in my abdomen and can't sleep. Telecoms license it's wireless spectrum from the federal government that makes every SWTF planned for California a federal undertaking until such time As applicants for any SWTFs in California place evidence in the public record proving FCC has written its rules specific to SWTFs as a class and complete EA, EIS for nationwide deployment. Every SWTF application in California remains incomplete stopping all shot clocks.

Thank you.

0:28 – 0:3510 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed28:16 · ≈ 9:28 AM

Chair Hart, members of the board we will now go to the line with Kimmy Van Dyke. Hello

CommentKimmy Van DykeProposedself-stated28:38 · ≈ 9:28 AM

my name is Kimmy Van Dyke and I've lived in Santa Barbara for the last 20 years. Our mission is to advocate for a community where technology is both state-of-the-art and safe for all. Our website is 5gfreesantabarbara.org Please join our email list and register for our Community Zoom meeting happening tomorrow night, Wednesday May 6th at 6pm. We are meeting monthly on the first Wednesdays and invite you to join a subcommittee. Email us at hello at 5gfreesantabarbara.org to volunteer!

Join our growing Facebook group with over 450 members. Nextdoor.com group page and subscribe to our YouTube channel, all listed under 5G Free Santa Barbara. The peer-reviewed published science contains thousands of studies that link EMS to our skyrocketing adult and child cancers, diabetes, autism, ADD, infertility, Alzheimer's, genotoxicity, and neurotoxicity. No studies have proven that this technology is safe, yet there are thousands of studies showing that it is very harmful. Small and large cell wireless facilities are being installed in our neighborhoods, near businesses and schools. We need to work together to stop this.

RF radiation exposure causes insomnia, headaches, nose bleeds, skin irritation, nausea, heart problems, fatigue Brain fog, behavior issues, anger, depression, anxiety and suicide. Thankfully many symptoms resolve when we replace wireless signals with hardwired connections and even turning the Wi-Fi off at night while we sleep is a great start. We want to collaborate with you to create and enact an immediate moratorium on all wireless infrastructure installation And modify current ordinances that are not protective to our health, safety environment and privacy. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed30:42 · ≈ 9:30 AM

Thank you Ms. Vondek.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed30:45 · ≈ 9:30 AM

And we will now go to Katie Mickey on the line.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed30:48 · ≈ 9:30 AM

Dear

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 11Proposed30:57 · ≈ 9:30 AM

Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. 5G3 Santa Barbara has been in dialogue with you, our County Board of Supervisors through private meetings January 17th through April 1st 2020 for the purposes of educating you on the biological harms incurred by 4G-5G technology and ask your support in safeguarding us, your constituents. We were told that you would support having our lawyer meet with yours This Saturday, we learned that on December 10th 2019 the County Board of Supervisors passed agreements with the telecom industry to deregulate the installation of wireless telecom facilities without public input.

We are stunned to hear this transgression of our public trust. The non-thermal effects of RFR have been substantiated by thousands of peer reviewed studies which prove harms caused by non ionizing radiation The FCC has not and does not plan to produce one single safety study. There is no insurance company that will cover any potential harms from this wireless technology.

Swiss RE pronounced the technology potentially as problematic as a bestos, which bankrupted so many firms that the Bestos Trust Fund was formed from which injured parties can seek compensation. To whom can our residents seek compensation when they incur biological harms. We want to collaborate with you and enact an immediate moratorium on all wireless infrastructure installations, and modify current ordinances that are not protective to our health, safety, environment, and privacy.

I'm Katie Mickey, and I'm the director of the Santa Barbara Body Therapy Institute. Thank you for taking my public comment.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed32:56 · ≈ 9:32 AM

Thank you Miss Mickey.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed32:59 · ≈ 9:32 AM

And Chair Hart, members of the board we will now go to Andy Caldwell on the phone. Andy, go ahead.

CommentAndy CaldwellProposed33:38 · ≈ 9:33 AM

Members of the board, this is Andy Caldwell representing COLAB. I've been getting press releases from the organization REACH. I think we got them yesterday announcing what the governor was planning to do and referencing both the San Luis Obispo County and Santa Barbara counties as partners in their effort I think there's some outstanding people on the REACH initiative, and I also have seen some people that I believe were appointed here locally to help see that our county gets reopened.

And I appreciate that. I'm not asking to be on either one of those committees, but I do ask for the board to clarify if in fact they have actually officially appointed Any of these members, how they were appointed and whether or not their meetings are subject to the Brown Act if in fact you are treating them as an official committee or sanction committee by the Board of Supervisors.

So we'd appreciate a clarification on that again I think there may be more than one effort out there. We're a little bit confused as you know, I watch the board's agenda every week and I've never seen the appointment or any information about the meetings and if they are the people you're going to rely on for advice we want to follow and track that meeting so thank you very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed35:18 · ≈ 9:35 AM

Thank You Mr. Caldwell

0:35 – 0:405 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed35:21 · ≈ 9:35 AM

And we will now go to Sonia Connors on the phone

CommentSonya ConnorsProposedself-stated36:09 · ≈ 9:36 AM

Good morning, my name is Sonya Connors. I hope you are all well. I'm speaking today because I'm deeply concerned about the quick unregulated and unsafe installation of 5G facilities throughout Santa Barbara County. It's ironic that residents are forced through a complex permitting system to renovate their houses yet the installation of 5G technology with unproven safety can be installed without local oversight.

Cities, counties and even other countries are placing moratoriums on this 5G technology until their dangers can be determined and regulated. 5G is shown to be very different from 4G, and the close proximity to schools, daycares, senior facilities, and homes with nearby and constant emission of dangerous radiation needs to be addressed immediately. The detrimental effects of 5G is only one aspect of the problems with 5G as lack of personal privacy and freedom are extremely important issues as well.

Santa Barbara has been on the forefront of environmental movements in so many ways and can continue to be for this critical issue. I request an immediate moratorium, and that the county supervisors and attorneys meet with the 5G Free Santa Barbara group to collaborate to find ways to keep our community safe. Thank you very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed37:23 · ≈ 9:37 AM

Thank You Ms. Connors

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed37:26 · ≈ 9:37 AM

And we will now go to our final speaker on the phone and that's Mark Schatillo

CommentMark SchatilloProposed37:55 · ≈ 9:37 AM

Good morning, members of the board. This is Mark Shatillo. I wanted to note that today is the anniversary of the start of the Hesed Cedar Fire 11 years ago so we don't lose track of the importance of fire preparation and emergency services but I wanted to take this moment to address a comment some comments that were made two weeks ago at the West Coast hearing where some board members expressed a lack of understanding about a key study concerning terpene taint where there is contamination of grapes from terpenes from adjacent agricultural products. And I wanted to just take a moment to explain the study and why it is significant to our efforts here in Santa Barbara as we try to address these issues.

Dr. Capone published a peer-reviewed study addressing terpene taint from eucalyptus trees as a surrogate for cannabis, and that's why it's relevant for us. Can't the terpene involved in 1-8-cineol or eucalyptol? And what this study showed was that there is a linear relationship between distance and contamination exclusively from airborne contamination of terpenes. That is, terpene generated from the eucalyptus trees causing contamination and being detectable in the grapes as they were adjacent to the eucalyptus trees. And the further away you got from the trees, the less the concentration became. The study also examined the effect of matter other than grapes which includes both the leaves and the stems of the grape plants as well as eucalyptus bark.

As a separate part of that study concluded that the existence of MOG in the bins of grapes also contributed to contamination I think it's important that the board understand that this study does establish that there is a linear relationship. And it also noted that the recognition levels for terpene contamination in Australian wines was between 2.6 and 3.4 parts per billion, so very low concentration. So that's what we know. What we don't know are the specifics about cannabis grows, what are the emissions factors What varieties, how different varieties and different sizes of grows.

What cumulative effect of multiple grows mean in terms of the potential for contamination of our wines, grapes that are being used to grow our wine? And then with that information what are the appropriate buffers? What are other techniques that can be used to prevent contamination? What sort of safe harbors do we have? I want the Board to understand that this is a documented phenomenon.

It's not just limited to MOG contamination, but also purely airborne transmission.

0:41 – 0:4920 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed41:07 · ≈ 9:41 AM

Mr. Shatillo, your time is up, Mr. Shatillo. I don't know if you can hear me. I know

CommentMark SchatilloProposed41:11 · ≈ 9:41 AM

that the board has directed the Ag Commissioner and Director Plowman to investigate this issue and it's being done so I wanted to just highlight the significance of this issue. Mr. Shatillo? Yeah. The Chair has a comment for you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed41:26 · ≈ 9:41 AM

I'm sorry Mark your time is up. Thank you

CommentMark SchatilloProposed41:29 · ≈ 9:41 AM

though. I could not hear that.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed41:37 · ≈ 9:41 AM

Thank you. Thank you. And that is our last- Mr Chair? Yes, Supervisor Labanino?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed41:44 · ≈ 9:41 AM

Yes Chair Hart and members of the board that was our first speaker.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed41:48 · ≈ 9:41 AM

I think Supervisor Labanino is speaking or

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8041:51 · ≈ 9:41 AM

is it? I just was going to see if, I think I may have been the one that caused the confusion about the working group and so I had made a post that used the wrong term appointed instead of invited Some folks from the community, so I think it's important if we kind of clear that with Mr. Gazzone as far as what that group is and just letting folks know what the status of that working group is that Mr. Caldwell had talked about.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed42:22 · ≈ 9:42 AM

Mr. Ghazani, did you want to comment now or we can do it as part of the COVID-19 presentation? Chair,

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed42:26 · ≈ 9:42 AM

we're just gesturing that this is scheduled to be discussed as part of the COVID presentation and we

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed42:30 · ≈ 9:42 AM

had

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed42:30 · ≈ 9:42 AM

coordinated closely with the CEO's office on this item to ensure compliance.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed42:34 · ≈ 9:42 AM

So we'll cover that on that item. Thank you. Supervisor Williams.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role42:39 · ≈ 9:42 AM

Thank you, Mr Chair. I since we already voted on it and there was a comment about the increased level of danger for prisoners during the covid crisis, I thought it would be appropriate to ask the sheriff or Chief Waslowski. I think that's him. I can't completely tell with the size of his face shield but um the uh you know It's also greater dangerous for the brave men and women.

That staff our correctional facilities, both are sworn peace officers and the non-sworn personnel. And I just wanted to invite the sheriff up to make a comment on National Correctional Officers Week which we just passed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed43:27 · ≈ 9:43 AM

Sheriff

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed43:27 · ≈ 9:43 AM

Brown?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed43:29 · ≈ 9:43 AM

Thank you Supervisor Williams and through the chair, appreciate the opportunity to just have a quick moment. I know you're doing these as honorary resolutions but because of The fact that our custody staff are really, as you say it, kind of the point of the spear on this. I just wanted to take a moment to bring to your attention the fact that they are continuing with their job that is normally a very difficult one. We like to say that they walk the toughest beat in the county.

They deal with some very rough customers, complex and difficult job under normal circumstances. But with the COVID-19 crisis, they have been put under even more strain and they have done absolutely fantastic job of working together to keep our jail safe to make sure that we don't have an outbreak of COVID- 19 in the jail facility. We've had several Staff members who have been stricken. We have had one inmate who has been stricken with COVID-19, but we've managed through very good efforts on their part and the part of our medical colleagues from WellPath who work side by side with our people in the jail to maintain a safe environment where that has not occurred as we've all seen in Lompoc what can happen if you have a contagion a correctional facility, we want to make sure that we do everything possible to prevent that.

But again it's not just what they've done in this effort, it's the day-to-day efforts that they continue to do and containing people who have committed serious crimes in our community. Protecting our community by doing that but at the same time they're working diligently to try to give the opportunities to people in our custody to turn their lives around and Some of the things that have happened and continue to happen are really a great credit to them and to their work. I particularly wanted to point out that since the COVID crisis, our inmates who are going through the STP program have made over 5,000 face shields for first responders.

They've refurbished masks that had deteriorated elastic straps The inmates themselves wanted to get into this, to work to help the community during this time as well. So I couldn't be prouder of the men and women who come to work every day and work in our facility. I know that you feel the same way. And I just wanted to take a moment publicly to say thank you to all of them and to their families for supporting them as they do this very important work in our community.

Thank you, Sheriff Brown. Supervisor Williams?

not transcribed≈11s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role46:24 · ≈ 9:46 AM

Just on a personal note in case there's folks watching this that have a lot of the negative preconceptions about correctional officers that I had when I was a teenager. I was some ways a real typical young brown man with a chip on my shoulder and good reasons to have chips on my shoulder but and a lot of negative preconceptions until one Santa Barbara County I'm going to At our jail are compassionate, thoughtful, dedicated people who do great work under sometimes very negative circumstances and should be celebrated.

Thank you Supervisor Williams. Supervisor Hartman?

not transcribed≈14s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.8647:23 · ≈ 9:47 AM

A couple of things. First of all, thank you Sheriff Brown for being here and thank you to your officers in our jail. I know that you're always looking for recruits and the esprit de corps among your officers is really commendable. Later, I would like to ask some questions about the inmates and the opportunities they have to communicate and how that compares to the Lompoc prison.

But I think that needs to wait probably for D1 on our agenda. But i did want to ask about the 5G and Mr. Gazzone could you describe what the county's authority is in

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed48:08 · ≈ 9:48 AM

Chair and supervisors, this is an area, telecoms is an area heavily regulated by the federal government both through the Telecommunications Act of 1996. And more recently through the Federal Communication Commission's small cell order in September 2018 concerning radio frequency emissions. which some of the commenters had discussed today. That's an area where both the state and local governments are expressly preempted from regulating the placement, construction or modification of wireless facilities on the basis of radio frequency emissions To the extent that those facilities comply with FCC standards.

And we did have a listening meeting back on March 6th, which seems so long ago, with Julian Gresser who's one of the attorneys for 5G. And it was a listening meeting by several attorneys in our county council office to several attorneys speaking on behalf of 5G Free Santa Barbara. So we listened, we got some ideas including on some ongoing litigation we have but this is an area where the board's latitude is very prescribed by federal law.

0:49 – 1:115 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed49:26 · ≈ 9:49 AM

Thank you Mr. Gazzani

The next item is department item number one. Would the clerk please read that item into the record?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed49:35 · ≈ 9:49 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, departmental item number one is from the county executive office. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding a coronavirus disease 2019 COVID-19 update.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed49:47 · ≈ 9:49 AM

Welcome Dr. Doronoso. I believe you're going to make this presentation and if board members would just hold their questions until the end of Dr. Doronoso's presentation so that She can have a chance to give all of her information at once.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed50:02 · ≈ 9:50 AM

Good morning, thank you Chair. So yesterday, we heard some hopeful rays about the lessening of the current governor's stay at home shelter in home executive order. I want to start the conversation with a reminder about the resilience roadmap that our governor has laid out. So, stage one is the safety and preparedness. And essentially this is where we've been for the past few weeks making essential workforce environment as safe as possible.

The governor alluded to or did state that Friday, We will be moving towards stage two with lower risk workplaces. So this is where we will look at lower risk retail sectors to open and looking at perhaps school programs and some childcare reopening, And higher risk workplaces resuming and ending with stage four, with the total lifting of the stay home order.

So the governor said yesterday that Friday we will as a state move together into stage two so what that means is that When we move to stage two, it'll be a gradual process and it will only include certain industries. Expanded retail with curbside pickup and associated manufacturing and supply chains related to those retailers. So for example furniture stores, bookstores, clothing stores, florists, I'm just in time for Mother's Day.

Sporting goods, toys, shoes those are all going to become doable with again curbside pickup come Friday. What's not included at this time are offices because currently offices can telework. Dine-in restaurants and shopping malls However, the governor did share that certain counties based on data grouped together as a region can attest for acceleration through stage two. So what this means is that if we meet the state's readiness criteria, we can move quickly to other low risk businesses listed in stage two.

So how we get there is that counties must create and submit a readiness plan which will be publicly available, uploaded on foreseeably the CDPH website. And the attestation is basically a self-examination of our county and how ready we are and whether we have a containment plan in place. So on a call with CDPH, I jotted some notes. So that's why this is anticipated readiness indicators and it's preliminary because again these are my notes based on a phone conference.

So the governor's anticipated readiness indicators, these are the indicators that we would have to include in our attestation The prevalence of disease, so specifically 14 days of declining prevalence of disease. And less than 10% of the tests are positive. Second is testing capacity, so that's one per 1,000 population and that the testing sites have to be within 30 minutes of reach.

Contact tracing, the ability for the county to do three times the daily positives over a seven day period. And then the need to be able to support vulnerable populations in isolation and that the isolation and quarantine orders can be issued within 24 hours of the contact tracing. Hospital capacity, the ability of our local hospitals to surge up to 25%, not only in beds, in the physical plant facility but also in the labor force. Vulnerable population special attention to those who are living in congregate settings.

Skilled nursing facility and long term care facilities specifically and that we monitor and that we have availability to test. The governor's anticipated containment indicators, the other half of the attestation package includes again testing and it moves up to two per 1,000 where we start with one Then we need to move within three months to the ability of doing two per 1,000. And again, the access within 30 minutes and then we also need to add in the community surveillance contact tracing.

Ramps up to the ratio of contact tracers must reflect the diversity of the general population. And that they be culturally competent and be able to handle an increase of three-fold, and the ability to manage low income cases. Vulnerable populations again special attention for congregate care, for homeless shelters, for corrections. Thank you. Needing to track workplace exposure, as well as partnership with our surrounding counties. So that we not only know the landscape of what's happening in our county but what's happening in the other two or three counties surrounding us as that may have an impact on our local landscape.

So we took a stab at assessing our readiness based on the governor's indicators. So with regards to prevalence of disease, we know that the number of active cases in our county is steadily declining at least for the last 14 day period and that if we take a look at the number of positives in the testing pool it's hovering around 10%. With regards to testing capacity, we took a all time ratio. We have 11 over 1,000 and that as of yesterday we have at least 5,023 And so when I say at least, this is at least what is inputted into our What it doesn't capture is that we are hearing that certain facilities, certain providers with the point of care. They are inputting the positives and not necessarily in putting the negatives so then that would bring our, that doesn't capture the total tests that we're doing as a county.

And so we will be working moving forward with all the labs on that. So Harvard put out a ratio that the yardstick for 152 tests per 100,000 per day. And so we took an assessment of what we are currently doing per day and the average hovers around 126 days. So there's still room to grow in that but what we're hoping for is Increase of community testing starting today in Santa Maria and going forth for the next 30 days. That will bring our capacity for testing up.

The ability to do contract tracing. So what I can tell you is that we have currently a core solid group of disease investigators, contact tracers who are monitoring and the teams are in place. We know that with community testing, The need to ramp up quickly these four teams, and that's what we have been doing. In addition to that, we have developed a homegrown curriculum and training program that we are sharing with our neighbors while we wait for the state to roll out their Contact tracing and investigation curriculum. We anticipate that that might be available at the end of the month, I'm not sure where Santa Barbara will be in the queue to take those online offerings so because we know that we need to do it and That is very credible, that's legit.

That's based on best practices that we have been doing in our disease containment unit. We are still pursuing additional nurses, investigators and tracers just so that we can have a ready bank of labor force in case we need to ramp up. Hospital surge capacity, 25%. We know from early on that we can attest and these are the numbers vetted by the hospital systems. That we have 699 beds available and that we also have our alternate care shelter plan established in the case of overflow is needed from the hospitals.

With regards to vulnerable populations, that is very near and dear to public health. So we have been in partnership making sure that our congregate and non-congregate vulnerable populations are sheltered or receiving services. And we are also rigorously monitoring our skilled nursing facilities for outbreaks standing by to assist if need be. The other assessment of how ready are we, I want to talk a little bit about the health officer order that we released. And it's Health Officer Order 2020-8 Essential Businesses within Santa Barbara County and This is also on our website for reference. So this health officer puts into place guidelines for social distancing, guidelines for operations, guideline for self-evaluation and the best part is I think the social distancing protocol so this really helps businesses to plan for what's ahead There are measures to protect employee health, there's measures to prevent crowds from gathering.

There's measures to keep people at least six feet apart. There's measures to prevent unnecessary contact and there are measures to increase sanitation. I anticipate that the details for the opening on Friday to be released on Thursday and it may contain Some guidelines around this, but this is a helpful tool that's available right now in our county that will allow businesses to think about and to plan for Friday and beyond.

So I mentioned earlier that our state-sponsored community testing starts today in Santa Maria, and all the appointments for the first day have been booked. We anticipate that with the three sites coming up at five days that we will have in totality An increase of 17,160 tests in our county. And again the sites is at the Santa Maria Fair Park in Lompoc it will be at the Anderson Recreation Center and in Santa Barbara it will be at the Earl Warren Showground. And between all these three sites, they will be open seven days a week. All will be open on Saturday and Sundays and the hours of operation will be from 7 AM to 7 PM. However, all the tests are by appointment only and it is by phone at 888-634-9000.

1-1-2-3 or online at lhi.care forward slash COVID testing and a group of us in the public health department have tried the phone and have tried the online it's fairly easy to do I'd like to move on to just a glance at our Santa Barbara County COVID-19 by the numbers as I have done in previous briefings. So, as of yesterday we have 526 total cases What's noteworthy again is the green line, which is charting our total recovered cases. And it still is around 77%.

The blue line describes the active cases and that is declining as well and hovering around 22%. The number of hospitalization is the red As well as the, we've captured the deaths in the black line. So in looking and anticipating the data that the state will be wanting, we took a stab at pulling together what we currently have in place and take a stab at categorizing it. Are we in a watchful zone? Are we good to go in a green zone, or are we in the red zone that we really need to pay attention and remediate so that we can move towards either the yellow or the green zone? So in looking at the total cases, the status.

Again as of yesterday, we have 526 cases, a grand total. And about 12 new cases. So what's important is that we look at trending, and so that's about a 2% daily change. What we've also included here for your review is the week on week change. And that's around 11%. So if we look at this graph, we see that the change from day to day is around 0.4 to the height of 0.23. So the average would be roughly around 1.6.

Testing results, that's an indicator that folks are interested in. And we are in the green zone because we are meeting that 10% of our tests are positive. The goal is to move this down. Healthcare worker infections, early on we had gathered that this is an important metrics that the state would like us to track. And so we would categorize this in the yellow zone just because this is a healthcare workers are at the backbone of our community and we worry when the numbers are 12-13%. Although I have read CDC papers where They are collecting the numbers from other jurisdictions and it hovers, it looks like anywhere between 16 or 19%, but still worrisome. And this just really speaks to the need for us to be attentive and monitor this situation.

Hospital capacity status, we are solidly in the green zone. So I'd like to draw your attention to the percent occupied. So of the number of cases that are hospitalized, Roughly a 6% of the total capacity and when we break that down to ICU, we're occupying around 10% of the available ICU beds. And this is already taken into consideration as set aside for normal non-COVID activities.

With regards to ventilators, if we account for the 154 ventilators in our system 5% are being used for COVID and a total of 19% being used throughout the system for other purposes, other illnesses. Contact tracing status is for now, it is in the green zone. So we can proudly say that we have done our contact tracing and we've served the isolation and quarantine orders within 24 hours for the 100% of the positive cases in a congregate setting or essential workplace.

We have on our dashboard, which we're fine tuning and we're hoping to make that public very shortly. We are tracking six outbreaks or at least we've documented six outbreaks. And outbreaks are defined as two or more cases linked to one address over a 14 day period. PPE status, we are in the green zone. The hospitals are required to daily report to CDPH and public health has access to that reporting and we can say that across our system all our hospitals are reporting greater than a 15 day supply of PPEs and that is the highest check box in fee survey done by CDPH.

So in summary, this is just a quick dashboard, a quick report card if you will where we are at with regards to cases with testing result. Healthcare workers infections, hospital capacity, hospitalization rate, ICU rate, contact tracing and PPE. With that I transition to Nancy.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈14s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈16s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
not transcribed≈14s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

1:11 – 1:177 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed1:11:02 · ≈ 10:11 AM

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. We wanted to provide you an update on the efforts being made towards the reopening framework project and our outreach efforts with REACH. So this week, the stakeholder objectives are two. One which happened yesterday is receive the draft framework and some draft standard and guidelines from the medical panel So that our stakeholder teams can start evaluating those. Starting today through Thursday, we're holding multiple informal round table discussions that'll compile input and feedback from these various groups.

And then we'll provide those back to the medical panel on Friday or Saturday once Reach and the project team have compiled that information. I'd like to talk about a little bit, the groups that are associated with this. We have about 25 or so Roundtable groups that are industry experts and community leaders within Santa Barbara. Some of the sectors include education institutions, so our schools, our colleges, etc., faith institutions, lodging, so tourism and hospitality, agribusiness, building and development, beverage industry, restaurants, chambers of commerce, technology, advanced manufacturing industrial, transportation energy, Events, venues, attractions, Hispanic businesses, non-profits and others.

So these are multiple groups that are going to have probably up to about 300 people participating that are industry leaders within their own right. These are specifically groups that through this project are being hosted by the public health department and directed by them. These are informal roundtable discussions. They are not subject to the Brown Act, but we do have a next phase in a sense through this project which is moving very quickly that will allow for multiple areas of public comment.

In our first presentation, this project was supposed to go about four to six weeks. It's been very expedited and largely in part I'd like to thank all of these county industry leaders that through their professionalism and leadership have put together these groups that they have identified to provide the best and quickest feedback to our medical panel. So starting next week, we will be kind of finalizing and wrapping up what we're doing with our REACH project.

We'll have a draft standards and guidelines for the sectors reviewed by the medical panel so they'll be doing that this weekend and a little bit through next week with this feedback from the stakeholders and they'll figure out where they need to incorporate it into those standards. Then we'll have the framework and draft standards once they're signed off by the public health officer, published on our readysbc.org. And actually have a feedback form so that comments can be received through businesses perhaps that want to participate in that process. They'll see the same documentation that these industry experts are seeing this week.

And they'll be able to submit that online and we'll evaluate those over the next coming weeks. This document that we're preparing, there's actually multiple documents, a main framework and then some component documents to that are going to be living documents. It's going to have to be refined and revised over time. We see on almost a weekly basis now obviously changes coming down from the state that we're going to have to incorporate into this process.

And that's going to make that document change over time. And we'll evaluate that as days go by. The Public Health Department will then make a presentation to your board, another opportunity for the public to comment. And we will continue over the next few weeks as this project completes to bring an update each week to your boards so you know where we're at and the public knows where we're at. And that concludes my comments. We'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:15:36 · ≈ 10:15 AM

Thank you, Ms. Anderson and Dr. Domenoso. Are there questions from the board? Supervisor Williams.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:15:44 · ≈ 10:15 AM

Well if that 14 day average is supposed to be under 10 to move forward I would expect especially since I don't know, is it my imagination or is Monday's numbers always bigger than the numbers on the weekend? And is that because of a delay in reporting from private sources over the weekend. But I have noticed that Mondays tend to spike in number of cases and something tells me that is more of a reporting issue than it is an actual physical issue.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:16:19 · ≈ 10:16 AM

Yes, and we've noticed that with our other metrics like hospitalization data as well. Something happens over the weekend.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:16:27 · ≈ 10:16 AM

So either somewhat discounting or evening that out or looking forward at what we expect in the next three days. Would you expect that we would meet the criteria by Friday? And are we preparing to Have action on Friday or on Tuesday to implement the opening of these lower risk businesses?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:16:56 · ≈ 10:16 AM

So, on Friday we anticipate that the governor will allow all low-risk retail. to be open. So what we're talking about is the attestation that we can speed through to the other businesses within the phase two. Without looking or without knowing the final guidance from the state, it's hard to say how much they will weigh the percentage increase. Some documents I've looked at or I've heard about describes the increase from a baseline without increase in testing, so it's wanting to look at a baseline and not a spike due to testing but actually a spike due to exposure.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:17:48 · ≈ 10:17 AM

And so for clarification that they retail The governor did say that local jurisdictions depending upon

not transcribed≈28s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

1:18 – 1:3023 turns

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:18:23 · ≈ 10:18 AM

Do, can through a health officer order put something more stringent? And I know that there are other jurisdictions not ours. There are other jurisdictions that are grappling with the incredibly high surges in cases as well as hospitalizations so he does give us that allowance.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:18:42 · ≈ 10:18 AM

Ms. Miyasato did you want to add something?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:18:44 · ≈ 10:18 AM

Just to

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:18:45 · ≈ 10:18 AM

clarify just in case anyone didn't watch the whole presentation is that when Supervisor Williams asked the question what will be open on Friday, and you said retail. The governor's order is basically curbside only. We just want to clarify it's curbside only for those retail businesses for Friday.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:19:01 · ≈ 10:19 AM

Thank you. And this question has come up. What about trying on shoes? What about trying on clothes? According to the conversation with CDPH that means curbside pickup delivery only.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:19:20 · ≈ 10:19 AM

And I think the more specific questions I have are more upon One industry that I think part of, that's been outside of the statewide order and is more based on our local decision making. Is elective health care, the elective part of the healthcare industry. And I'd just like to know where we're going with that. Tens of thousands of people who are out of work, a lot of those people are going to lose their insurance.

If they are needing any surgery, they're going to need to get it now before they lose their COBRA or their insurance. And of course if there's any industry that we should be able Expect in practice social distancing, it would be doctors.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:20:18 · ≈ 10:20 AM

So several weeks ago Governor Newsom signaled that elective or postponed medical procedures can resume and at that point we immediately issued a health officer order allowing that and we actually wasn't health officer order. It was a provider alert. Informing our communities. And that was a conversation that we had with the hospitals, with the outpatient surgery centers, with physician offices about the criteria, the guidelines that must be met in order to resume business. So I want to say that has been in effect for over two weeks now.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:21:07 · ≈ 10:21 AM

Can you just translate that into English, I mean we're seeing in the press the fact that Sansom has been heavily impacted. We have a number of healthcare workers that are out of work. Now part of that is based on your forgetting the term of art, your provider directive. And part of it's based on the public's perception and whether they are asking for appointments or not.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:21:42 · ≈ 10:21 AM

So

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:21:43 · ≈ 10:21 AM

can people ask for appointments now for elective

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:21:47 · ≈ 10:21 AM

services? Our provider system is aware that they can resume seeing some low risk, seeing some postponed appointments. So we know that because we've been in conversations with the hospitals as well as with our group practices and even our dentists. Various providers about where do I get PPEs, what do I do with this? What do I do with that? So we have a hotline within the health department that providers can call to get assistance. And so we communicate with our providers through provider alerts and so that's the communication in writing. And disperse through faxes, through emails, through various channels so that they know.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:22:42 · ≈ 10:22 AM

Sure, you may do that just the weakness of our system is how privatized it is and therefore how decentralized it is. You don't have the physical capability of communicating with all providers. You communicate with bigger providers. And you hope that that information gets to everybody. It doesn't always, right? So that communication is maybe perfect and effective at the level of a cottage or a Sansum. It may not be at the level of every private provider in town or surgery centers or others. So that's why I'm just asking this question so that we can help send Those that are out there that may be getting messages from us.

That as long as they can create a low risk situation, they can be open for business is what you're saying. Is that what you're saying? Okay, great. Then the other The area or sector of workers that I have some concern for is the low wage economy of outdoor laborers, folks that don't necessarily even qualify for public assistance. They don't necessarily qualify for unemployment benefits.

And it is an area that you can be at low risk. If you're a gardener, you don't really have to get close to anybody. So can you talk about whether that's been part of this discussion Of businesses, if we do the attestation that would be back in business.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:24:36 · ≈ 10:24 AM

So we are waiting for the detailed list of businesses that this state considers low risk and we anticipate that Thursday.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:24:46 · ≈ 10:24 AM

Great. And then so I guess the question would How, so there's two routes for any one of these industries would be. One is if they were included in the governor's definition of low risk this Friday and secondly if we proceed with the attestation what further businesses we would open up and I would just ask that you Take a look at that, I mean it's an area of great levels of economic vulnerability.

And I'm not sure as a lay person it seems to me low risk but I just ask you to take a look at it.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role1:25:37 · ≈ 10:25 AM

We'll do.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:25:38 · ≈ 10:25 AM

Yeah, I think it's important to remember that we don't know what the guidelines the governor will issue. We don't know the degree of specificity, we don't know if there is going to be any flexibility afforded to the county. But we'll know more on Thursday when the governor announces those guidelines. Supervisor Williams or excuse me, Hartman?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:25:57 · ≈ 10:25 AM

I have a couple of questions to clarify. The first is it's my understanding then that counties may have the opportunity to be stricter or somewhat more flexible. And you mentioned something about the flexibility coming to counties that constitute a region rather than individual counties. Did I misunderstand that or could you elaborate? So,

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:26:24 · ≈ 10:26 AM

that is one criteria for the attestation that we are not doing this by ourselves. That we are in partnership with neighboring counties so that there is a regional approach. So that is one of the criteria that was proposed on the call.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:26:43 · ≈ 10:26 AM

And I know we've been working with our neighboring counties on a range of things, are we working now? I think people don't appreciate how much has been going on behind the scenes getting ready for reopening doing all the work in the public health arena. So could you just describe a little bit about what we're doing with our partner counties to perhaps be ready given that our region is somewhat, well looks good on many of these indicators.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:27:13 · ≈ 10:27 AM

So we've had a really strong solid relationship with SLOW and with Ventura so I can describe the relationship with SLOW. with Santa Barbara as a strong partnership between Dr. Borenstein and Dr. Ansorg, and the same with Ventura, Dr. Levine. So the three of them often speak together and brainstorm strategies. I can also say that a rock solid relationship with Ventura Public Health Director Rego. And so as a matter of fact, as we were contemplating the roadmap, we were constantly texting and calling and we share resources.

We share strategies, we share curriculum, we share resources. And so the three of our counties, we have been looking at each other's data as well. And has always been our goal to roll out something if it was a road map together because that the three contiguous counties have residents who work in one another's county or vice versa. So it's very critical.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:28:34 · ≈ 10:28 AM

Thank you, and I had a few more questions. With regard to testing we still have criteria in effect for who's eligible to be tested. Could you just review that for people who are listening? So that's- Yes. You can't just sign up for your appointment and turn up.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:28:52 · ≈ 10:28 AM

Right, so with the community testing, the governor's intent is to make it available to everyone who needs it. So the priority again is the healthcare workers, first responders, those who are living or working in congregate setting and then the asymptomatics and then the symptomatic community members. So there is a, when the community member calls the number for the testing or goes on website. They are led through those three criteria and it is pretty broad again with the goal of if the community member wants to be tested needs to be tested that there's a low threshold barrier that exists.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:29:49 · ≈ 10:29 AM

And then on slide 10, you describe there's testing five days a week but it'll be available seven days a week at some facility I assume. So it will be staggered. The schedule will be staggered at the three different locations so I just wanted to make that clear.

1:30 – 1:3511 turns

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:30:13 · ≈ 10:30 AM

We are shooting for Saturdays and Sundays to be open at all sites, but then we staggered the other days. So

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:30:21 · ≈ 10:30 AM

if we consider the various criteria that the governor has set out What seems to be the bottleneck for us in Santa Barbara County? I assume, and I'm really impressed by the contact tracing and how much work you've already done to put that in place. But is that the bottleneck or what do you anticipate our greatest needs will be?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:30:52 · ≈ 10:30 AM

That's a great question. For now, I don't anticipate the disease investigation contact tracing isolation and containment to be an issue just because we have a core group ready. We anticipated before the launch of today's testing, we had stood up the planning two weeks prior. And so we have a solid team with additional people being recruited to be the backup, second level and third level.

I want to say that we are as prepared as we can be within the public health department and I want to take a step and say that given the numbers of our healthcare systems, hospitalization capacity, that we're also there. In the event, there's been some worries about well what cases in the vulnerable populations. We have that in the plans as well, we have that covered. So I want to say that we are well positioned just because we've done a lot of planning, a lot of partnership, a lot of heavy lifting these past two or three weeks in anticipation of mass testing and in anticipation that we needed to be in order to reopen.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:32:19 · ≈ 10:32 AM

So maybe just to put a precise point on that, I don't know that the term bottleneck applies to our situation. What we know right now, we are in good shape looking forward and going ready to begin the process of the attestation depending, of course, on what the governor does offer in the way of guidelines. Ms.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 5Proposed1:32:38 · ≈ 10:32 AM

Miyasato? There's a couple of things that were new though to us from Dr. Dover knows his discussion and that is the governor's office saying that our contact tracers have to reflect the ethnic diversity of our population. So while the public health department is doing a yeoman's job and we've gotten all departments signed up to do that, that's something that we have to check as well as making sure the testing sites are within 30 minutes of populations. There's so lot of those details that they added in I think we're going to have to look at carefully before we can actually say, we can attest to whatever the

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:33:11 · ≈ 10:33 AM

requirement. CEO Bissotto through the chair and even on that because of our work with the immigrant health task force and because of our partnership with United Way, we anticipate getting 30 additional tracers that would be reflective of the diverse community that we live in so even that It's not the proportion that are for our county population, but at least it's a step there.

So

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:33:44 · ≈ 10:33 AM

do we have a need? Will we be hiring in other words from our contact tracing or do we already have that in place at least for the next foreseeable future?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:33:53 · ≈ 10:33 AM

We're in the process of hiring additional. So we are in the process still. We want to make sure that as we reopen and county staff return to their normal or day-to-day or previous COVID-19 assignments, that we do have non-county staff available to support our efforts. And

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:34:17 · ≈ 10:34 AM

if people are interested?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:34:19 · ≈ 10:34 AM

Yes, so we are working on a press release and we have the job descriptions. We have the form and we will be posting that on our website very shortly.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:34:34 · ≈ 10:34 AM

And I had just one more and that really is to do with the jail. And whether you could describe, I've had some really heart wrenching emails from people connected to the Lompoc prison and the absence of communication among the inmates. I think all of us have a greater appreciation for what it is confined in quarters smaller than we're used to. And so people are really concerned about relatives, and I've had emails even from some of the inmates.

So could you talk number one about the connections that are available to people in the county jail with families, telephone or anything else while it's difficult to have physical contact? And then, do we have any influence or moral suasion with Lompoc about the conditions there for people?

1:35 – 1:4112 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 13Proposed1:35:39 · ≈ 10:35 AM

Supervisor Hartman through the chair. You're absolutely right that the crisis has impacted inmates negatively in terms of and their families in terms of their ability to stay in touch. We and all correctional facilities in this state Put a suspension on visitations, in-person visitations in the jail as result of this. And we recognize that's a negative impact. We want and encourage family members to stay in touch with their loved ones when they are incarcerated.

So we've taken steps to try to address that in some other areas. Provided every inmate with two 15 minute phone calls per week that are paid for through the Inmate Welfare Fund. In addition to that, we've distributed and are distributing postage paid postcards so they can stay in touch by writing and through the mail. And in addition to that, there's the regular telephone system that is available at cost. People can either put, inmates can pay for it themselves or family members or loved ones can put money on their books and provide them with credit so they can continue to make phone calls. So those are three methods that are still employed to keep people connected during these difficult times. With respect to the prison, it is a completely different system.

It's the Federal Bureau of Prisons. It's at that national level above the county level and above the state level, completely separate system. We have a good working relationship with the prison, in most instances. This is kind of a unique situation though where they have 23 prisons across the nation. They have had outbreaks in a number of them and they're dealing with some very difficult situations at the moment.

And we don't have any additional information than you do at this point from them in terms of what's happening there. I do know that they have also liberally granted free phone calls for their inmates as well, so their inmates do have an ability to stay in touch that way, as well as writing materials as well. So I can tell you that I have knowledge of that but other than that I don't have any other information for you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:38:19 · ≈ 10:38 AM

Thank you, Supervisor Hartman. Any questions from Santa Maria? Supervisor Adams? Yeah.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:38:28 · ≈ 10:38 AM

Okay Dr. Delranosa I'd like you to go to page 13 of your presentation please. Are we there yet?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:38:52 · ≈ 10:38 AM

Yes, we

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:38:53 · ≈ 10:38 AM

are. I'm just looking at myself in Santa Maria. I can't tell what you guys are doing down there. It is up on the slide, Mr. President. Okay, thank you very much. So Dr. DelRenoso as I brought to your attention yesterday We didn't deduct the recoveries from There's total cases here. How many current cases do we actually have?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:39:24 · ≈ 10:39 AM

We have 526 cases as of yesterday.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:39:30 · ≈ 10:39 AM

I mean, actual current cases because you didn't deduct the recoveries. So there's over 400 recoveries at this point isn't that

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:39:37 · ≈ 10:39 AM

right? Right and so that would be on slide 12.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:39:43 · ≈ 10:39 AM

Well, I realize that but see, I keep having a problem with this and I think I've asked you about this every presentation. We keep inflaming the public with this ever increasing number which isn't reflective of actual situation. We have over 400 people who have recovered so we really only have 100 actual cases. Isn't that right?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:40:11 · ≈ 10:40 AM

Correct, we have 114 active cases.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:40:15 · ≈ 10:40 AM

Yeah okay so I don't understand the purpose unless you're just trying to keep everybody hysterical and frightened with showing a total case count like this and having those total daily changes That doesn't reflect the actual number of cases that you're dealing with at any one time. Isn't that right? That's only an accumulation of all of the cases that you've ever known about, isn't that right?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:40:58 · ≈ 10:40 AM

Correct and therefore we-

1:41 – 1:4922 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:41:04 · ≈ 10:41 AM

All right, thank you. Next question

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:41:09 · ≈ 10:41 AM

is- I didn't understand your question as it relates to this graph.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:41:19 · ≈ 10:41 AM

Well, we're keeping people's hair on fire pretty good. I think that seems to be the purpose of these kind of graphs that accumulate the cases without reflecting how many people recover. If you want to keep everybody hysterical, keep showing them ever increasing numbers but if you take out the recovered people It's way down below what, we only have 114 cases right at the moment.

So that's the problem I continue to have and have had since the beginning of this thing. We're just showing people like a worst case scenario which isn't reflective of real conditions in the world.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:42:04 · ≈ 10:42 AM

You know Supervisor Adam-

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:42:05 · ≈ 10:42 AM

Can I answer your question?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:42:06 · ≈ 10:42 AM

Supervisor Adam, this is Chair Hart. Slide 12 that precedes slide 13 Has all of the information in context that you're seeking. It has both the total cases, it has the recovered cases, it has the active cases, it has the hospitalization and it has the deaths all on one slide and that was, that slide preceded this slide that you are talking about so I think that the point of slide 12 was to show everything in context. And then slide 13 was to go into greater detail with those specific other things.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.861:42:44 · ≈ 10:42 AM

And if I might add, I just find that downward trend of the blue line very reinforcing and suggesting that we're going to reopen soon.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:42:57 · ≈ 10:42 AM

But go ahead, just continue with your questions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:43:01 · ≈ 10:43 AM

Okay, thank you. Do you have Dr. Delrinoso, the chart number one that I asked for yesterday?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:43:11 · ≈ 10:43 AM

No, that was not part of my presentation.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:43:16 · ≈ 10:43 AM

Well I realize that I asked you yesterday, let's just establish what chart number one was. I asked for three charts and just want to talk about the first one. I wanted a cumulative comparison of influenza and COVID-19 deaths from January 1st 2020 to present. And I was given a chart which I'm sorry that you can't display down there. That shows that the first actual flu death, just regular flu was on 1-22 and the last one was on March 18th.

And it's a funny chart because I wish you could put it up there because It seems like we stopped having flu deaths And then we started having COVID deaths. And I'm looking at page 14 of your presentation where we have eight and a half times more negative tests than we have positive tests, and I'm just wondering how we got that so cleanly segregated?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:44:40 · ≈ 10:44 AM

Supervisor Adam through the chair, when you asked for those flu graphs I understood that was for your personal edification. I wasn't clear that you wanted me to include them in today's presentation but if that is your request, I can certainly include it in next week's presentation for discussion.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:45:03 · ≈ 10:45 AM

Yeah, and that might be a good thing. And maybe we'd have to review those to make sure that's actually correct because it just seems odd to me that there would be no flu deaths intermingled with the And maybe I'm reading it wrong. Maybe if you had it up, you could probably explain it to me. But anyway, maybe we'll talk about that next week more. The other thing, I asked for two more graphs comparing both deaths and recoveries of COVID versus regular flu. And you told me that there was no record of how many people get the regular flu.

And so I asked you how they actually get the death rate then for the regular flu. And you didn't respond as of last evening on that, and do you know any more about that now?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:46:04 · ≈ 10:46 AM

I do not. If I could ask, I will bring back the answer and the graphs and include that in next week's presentation.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed1:46:13 · ≈ 10:46 AM

That'd be awesome. Thank you very much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:46:15 · ≈ 10:46 AM

Thank you, Supervisor Adam. Any questions for Supervisor Lavenino? Yes,

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.801:46:20 · ≈ 10:46 AM

just a couple. I've been asked a lot about antibody testing too and I was wondering if Dr. Reynoso could just touch on that for a moment. When that might be available and by whom.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:46:33 · ≈ 10:46 AM

So the community testing that the state is sponsoring, my belief is or what we were told is that that is the infrastructure for when this state makes these serology testing available. They will use the same mechanism at the same vendor and pivot from the PCR to the serology testing.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.801:46:57 · ≈ 10:46 AM

Okay, and then on if somebody wants to be tested. And you said there is a low threshold. So if somebody's just in the community has no symptoms isn't one of those kind of quote like protected class or has one of those? Is there a way for them to just give their name so that when we do get through those people, I know all the other first responders, healthcare workers, congregate, all those folks get to go first. But is there a way to put your name on a list in case you're interested in just getting a test for your own peace of mind?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:47:32 · ≈ 10:47 AM

Yes, so we tried that route and we got appointments. So anyone essentially living in our community or not even in our community, anybody in Santa Barbara County can get the same test in Ventura, Orslo and vice versa can call the number. And that number that I listed is good for all of the OptumServe sites in California, actually in the nation, I believe. So it is available. They just need to call that number or go online to make that appointment.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.801:48:09 · ≈ 10:48 AM

Thank you, last question is just there's also been a lot of back and forth people not sure whether to wear a mask out in public when they're going to a store or not a store some businesses require it some don't What's your guidance going forward? Or does that come from you?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:48:29 · ≈ 10:48 AM

So it will come from the health officer order if it was to be a mandated effort. So right now, the health officer still is in the strong recommendation to wear face covering. If you are unable to social distance, and especially if you are indoors. And so that is part of something that would be considered as we do more lifting of restrictions. But for now it is still recommendation simply because the science is not firm on the protective benefits.

1:49 – 1:545 turns

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.801:49:13 · ≈ 10:49 AM

Okay, and then lastly just last question is what's your level of confidence that we will you'll be able to. And I know it's just based on kind of what we heard from the governor but what's your level of confidence that we are will be able to attest sometime next week that we meet those criteria in this county?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed1:49:38 · ≈ 10:49 AM

Because we have been testing the data, both I personally think that we can knowing what we know today. Without the guidelines being revealed, I think that our data puts us in a ready state. I think there are elements of the containment piece that we need to strengthen but I think we're in a good spot. And this is really due to our CEO's effort in assembling the expert panel to work on reopening. So we started thinking about this about three weeks ago, so I think that we are in a good spot to proceed.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:50:23 · ≈ 10:50 AM

Thank you Supervisor Lavanino. We have five requests to speak on this item. Madam Clerk could you?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:50:30 · ≈ 10:50 AM

Yes chair Hart members of the board we have five requests to speak on this item and we are going to begin with Andy Caldwell on the phone.

CommentAndy CaldwellProposed1:50:55 · ≈ 10:50 AM

Members of the board this is Andy Caldwell representing Colab I want to thank News Talk for Presenting the information on a different scale, and that different scale in the graph before you indicates a very clear picture indicating recovery. Significant higher numbers have recovered than are actively infected. This means the bulk and the brunt of the crisis is behind us.

I also want to draw attention to that the red line represents new cases. This has been relatively flat the entire time Do you remember they predicted an exponential growth of infections and death? It never happened. And in fact, it never happened anywhere if you look at these graphs from the state of California as a whole, United States as a whole plus other nations. The other thing I want to bring up is they keep pushing the blue line. This is Peter Adams' point. They keep promoting the blue line in public and or the media's doing that. They're not doing the math. So for instance, out of the 526 cases three out of five did not occur in the general public. They were in restricted access slash confined spaces, i.e., nursing homes and prisons.

So the general public has had probably about 150 cases out of a population of 440,000 people which never did justify a lockdown The experts are talking about the fact, and these are guys out of Stanford that this is a self-limiting virus. That it is not going to go on forever. The other points I want to make is number one your county graph starts on 421. Why didn't start back in January when the first California case was confirmed?

And this also gets to Supervisor Adams' point. Did this thing only begin once the governor issued a shutdown order? This news hot graph starts in mid-March, and the bottom line again we have the first confirmed case in California in January many local doctors said they were treating an unknown virus in December something else that keeps Being missing from the data is how many people tested were asymptomatic, i.e., they tested positive but with no symptoms?

That's really important and the bottom line with regards to Governor's new order that's effective Friday it doesn't give local businesses an advantage over online if they can't go on and try something on Or shop locally, they might as well just stay online. That is not going to do well for our brick and mortar businesses. Again I don't believe you've been best served by the data your public health department's presenting to the media and even to you. The chart in front of you on a real scale shows the dramatic X where active cases and recovered cases cross That is what you should be acting on versus the governor's continued overzealous control of our economy and our society. I do believe we need to continue to protect the ill and the vulnerable, but again, if you take those numbers out of prison and nursing homes which have shut down and lost tens of thousands of jobs for 140 cases out of 440,000 residents That's a question your constituents expect you to answer.

Thank you.

1:54 – 2:007 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed1:54:53 · ≈ 10:54 AM

We will now go to public record provided by Nadia Lee Abushina. In this time of crisis surrounding the coronavirus pandemic, it is unsurprising that the prisoners of Lompoc Federal Prison are witnessing the most extreme miscarriages of public responsibility in the county. As leaders of our county community we implore you to stand as our allies to advocate for the basic human rights of prisoners in Lompoc. We ask for your help in working with the Santa Barbara Public Health Department to create a health equity task force, to hire a cultural competency director and to outfit prisoners and prison personnel with adequate personal protective equipment and hand sanitizer. We ask for your help in working with the warden of Lompoc to ensure that prison personnel who are displaying symptoms of COVID stay home until they are well and to waive fees for phone calls.

We ask for your help in lobbying for the release of prisoners who are medically fragile, elders, non-violent and minor offenders. Adherents and advocates of the agreement to end hostilities and anyone within a year or two years of their release date. We ask for your help in advocating for expedited parole hearings and a reduction of jail admissions through the redirection of people to community-based mental health and substance abuse treatment services. These are just a few of the changes we hope we can count on you to implement. We look forward to future conversations wherein we can work together to end the moral crisis of mass incarceration in our county. Thank you, Nadia Lee Abushinov.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:56:28 · ≈ 10:56 AM

And we will now go to the phone with Cynthia Feinberg.

CommentCynthia FeinbergProposed1:56:39 · ≈ 10:56 AM

Hi, this is Cindy Feinberg and I want to applaud all your efforts that the county has been making to keep our community safe and the one statement I just wanted to make was regarding Well, first of all, I applaud the efforts offered to be opening via community. But one thing I wanted to just point out is as was mentioned regarding the masks. I think it is important to consider mandating that as we open that the business where employees wear a mask as well as the patrons because the research as has been mentioned has been disputed but if you look at other countries with success rates when they've been opening up If everyone wears a mask, it does help reduce the risk of any spikes to the virus. So I just really encourage that we support and that we recommend to the public health officer that we do encourage the widespread use of masks similar to what's going on in the city of Santa Barbara.

Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 10Proposed1:57:48 · ≈ 10:57 AM

We will now go to public comment from Ruth Alcantara. In this time of crisis surrounding the coronavirus pandemic, it is unsurprising that the prisoners of Lompoc Federal Prison are witnessing the most extreme miscarriages of public responsibility in the county. As leaders of our county community we implore you to stand as our allies to advocate for the basic human rights of prisoners in Lompoc. We ask for your help in working with the Santa Barbara Public Health Department to create a health equity task force, to hire a cultural competency director and to outfit prisoners and prison personnel with adequate personal protective equipment and hand sanitizer. We ask for your help in working with the warden of Lompoc to ensure that prison personnel who are displaying symptoms of COVID stay home until they are well and to waive fees for phone calls.

We ask for your help in lobbying for the release of prisoners who are medically fragile, elders, non-violent and minor offenders, adherents and advocates of the agreement to end hostilities. And anyone within a year or two years of their release date. We ask for your help in advocating for expedited parole hearings and reduction of jail admissions through the redirection of people to community based mental health and substance abuse treatment services. These are just a few of the changes we hope we can count on you to implement. We look forward to future conversations wherein we can work together to end the moral crisis of mass incarceration in our county. Thank you, Ruth.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed1:59:18 · ≈ 10:59 AM

Thank you Ms. Alcantara

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed1:59:20 · ≈ 10:59 AM

And we will now go to Corey Heyman on the line to be followed by a letter to be read into the record from Kenny Morris who is our final speaker

CommentRuth AlcantaraProposed1:59:34 · ≈ 10:59 AM

Good morning Chair Hart and members of the Board of Supervisors Thank you for your continuing leadership and thank you to County Public Health for its planning effort during the past couple of weeks. The STAR Program for San Luis Obispo provides a solid framework for this county to proceed with reopening, and provides a basis for this county to exercise local control and governance to go beyond the Governor's Phase 2 order.

Our county's overall COVID-19 numbers, particularly hospitalization remain very low I would also like to echo Supervisor Adams' comments regarding the testing statistics and the appropriate metrics for determining the current spread of the disease. The stakes are high with increasing unemployment, higher poverty and children stuck without school campuses in critical youth programs. We need not or cannot afford further delay proceeding with reopening. I therefore urge the board and staff to move as quickly as possible. Thank you.

2:00 – 2:0826 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:00:33 · ≈ 11:00 AM

And we will now go to a letter to be read into the record by Kenny Morris. Dear Board of Supervisors, thank you for the opportunity to comment on the current housing situation during the pandemic. I'm Kenny Morris, a UCSB student who is organizing with my fellow Ivy tenants as part of the Isla Vista Housing Crisis Coalition. I'd like to raise concerns over the lack of a hard date for repayment of deferred rent in Ordinance 44-5. While often a property manager may be flexible in rent repayment we could see it being potentially exploitable by the property owner. There is a stark power imbalance between landlords and tenants, and we don't want some of the large property owners to use that to strong arm tenants into a deadline that they can't make.

Both San Diego and Los Angeles have enacted similar measures with their eviction moratoriums. LA has given tenants a 12 month repayment deadline after the official end of the emergency. And thinking of the countless people who keep our city running that are living paycheck-to-paycheck in SB, that should be the minimum. If the crisis continues past June, we may need to revisit. If you'd like to maintain the flexibility of the ordinance, you may consider this deadline to be the minimum time and empower parties to extend further if needed. You've all done a lot of work to make sure that people are taken care of at this time and I think that setting this deadline could be a beneficial way To make sure that people are taken care of after as well.

Thank you, Kenny Morris.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:01:59 · ≈ 11:01 AM

Thank you Mr. Morris

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:02:00 · ≈ 11:02 AM

and that is our final speaker.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:02:01 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Thank you. Is there anything else that staff would like to add to the conversation? Yes, Dr. Duranosa

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed2:02:10 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Yes, thank you. I just want to clarify that the three community testing sites are doing the PCR or the nasal swab to test for the presence of the virus. Currently they are not doing the serology tests or otherwise known as the antibody tests and the structure will be used in the future when the state has gives us the allocation but for It is just the PCR or swab test.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:02:43 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Thank

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed2:02:43 · ≈ 11:02 AM

you, thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:02:44 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Any other questions for staff? Supervisor Williams?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:02:48 · ≈ 11:02 AM

Well it's not a question I just want to first of all praise staff for getting the testing going as you promised and in terms of the attestation. At least in my view, that we should be opening up more businesses than the state opens up this Friday. At least where you can envision and give the guidelines for proper social distancing and precautions. And I know that's a lot of work. I know this is an intense time but there are tens of thousands of Santa Barbarans out of work.

Time is short before many slip into poverty or have their housing endangered and think that there is a lot of health outcomes that hang in the balance for them and their Children. And so I just hope that, um, that the department views this as a opportunity to really to look at what businesses can be opened and what precautions can be taken. And that I very much look forward to Tuesday's hearing, to look at the attestation.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:04:14 · ≈ 11:04 AM

Any other comments? I did have a question for those businesses that want to open on Friday that are in the Governor's list currently. What guidance would they look to, to help them assist in getting open? Is there something that you'd direct them to?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed2:04:32 · ≈ 11:04 AM

Yes, Supervisor Hart. I would say that a good preparation would be to look at our most current health officer order so that would be the 2020-8 in it is very detailed guidance on operations for these central businesses. So there's lots to be gained from looking at that and starting the planning process Using the social distance protocol as well as the other guidance for employee self-check, as well as operations.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:05:07 · ≈ 11:05 AM

And that can be found at publichealthsbc.org. There's a tab there for public health officer orders and they can go right on there and click that and get a copy of that directly.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed2:05:17 · ≈ 11:05 AM

Yes.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:05:17 · ≈ 11:05 AM

Thank you.

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed2:05:18 · ≈ 11:05 AM

Thank you. All

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:05:19 · ≈ 11:05 AM

right. Supervisor Williams?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:05:21 · ≈ 11:05 AM

Sorry

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:05:22 · ≈ 11:05 AM

I

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:05:22 · ≈ 11:05 AM

one of the speakers mentioned masks and just No, I understand that there is some nuance to the efficacy of masks that literature I've seen as that they improve outcomes unless they cause you to touch your face more which I suppose could happen in settings where you're doing intense manual labor more than others. So I hope as we do this Reopening, it becomes a little bit more imperative maybe for us to specify what businesses would be expected to have masks. And whether it's the customers or the employees or both depending on what industry we're talking about. I see that as important especially given Maybe the lack of uniformity that we will have jurisdiction to jurisdiction, which can be confusing for people. I mean average people don't always, they have busy lives.

They don't always know all the specifications of jurisdiction between counties and cities. And so something that Is simple enough for the public to know about, but still increases the use of masks or face shields is definitely something I would support. And I actually view it as a positive thing for helping business and employment reopen as it helps take the proper precautions so that people can get back to work.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:07:07 · ≈ 11:07 AM

Any other questions or comments on this item? Is there a motion?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:07:11 · ≈ 11:07 AM

Yeah, I've got one chair.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:07:12 · ≈ 11:07 AM

Supervisor Lavenino?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:07:16 · ≈ 11:07 AM

Unless I missed it, I didn't think we got the explanation regarding the public group that we put together and what restrictions and how that came to be. But that was a question we were going to address. Maybe I missed it.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:07:31 · ≈ 11:07 AM

Thank you Ms. Anderson

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 14Proposed2:07:33 · ≈ 11:07 AM

Supervisor Lavinino through the chair. Thank you, we did touch on it a bit but I can reiterate this is a public health department hosted and directed project these roundtables that are being had this week are informal roundtable discussions they are not subject to the Brown Act purposely for one timing and there are no designation or appointments made by the Board of Supervisors

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:08:04 · ≈ 11:08 AM

Thank you.

not transcribed≈8s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen

2:08 – 2:1218 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed2:08:13 · ≈ 11:08 AM

Yeah, I just want to say this before we get done here. In my view the time has arrived for us to recognize that the measures that we as a society have taken to deal with this epidemic have been a huge success. The closure of our economy and the imposition of social distancing have had the desired effect. The time has come to focus on restoring economic health.

Our goal in the beginning was to bend the curve of new infections down, that happened. The governor justified the stay at home order by the legitimate concern that our medical system would be overwhelmed. That was successful. We should have declared victory and begun opening our economy. That process has yet to begin. What disturbs me is that we now seem to be moving the goal posts, This is to focus on the number of tests we can perform.

This is going to lead to an artificial spike in undocumented cases, or in documented cases. Obviously the more people are tested, the more infections you will find. Evidence is emerging suggesting that many people have contracted the disease but remain without symptoms. The disease is far more widespread in our communities than previously thought, and it is far less lethal than predicted.

I am on record as having objected to this testing for positive infections protocol to begin with. The strategy of positive testing with contact tracing is a limited value because there are people who have That presents without symptoms, yet positive for the virus. We cannot find what we cannot see. I heard yesterday that the resources of our medical system committed to the COVID response was measured by hospital beds is only 6% utilized. That means we have 94% open. That doesn't sound like an emergency to me.

Our strategy of lockdown and social distancing has been a success. But ironically, it has also slowed down the accumulation of herd immunity that is the only secure solution to this problem for our society. At Marion Hospital I'm told we're down 600 surgeries since March 15th. That's 600 people waiting for bypasses, knee surgeries and hip surgeries and others.

This started out as a healthcare emergency, now it's an economic emergency. The effects will be dramatic and long lasting. The sooner we move the focus to minimizing the economic damage, the better off we'll be. And as others on this board have acknowledged, the economic fallout of this epidemic carries its cost as well. We need to move forward thoughtfully to keep these competing goals in balance. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:11:23 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Thank you Supervisor Adam. Is there a motion to approve the staff recommendations?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:11:31 · ≈ 11:11 AM

So moved. Second.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:11:33 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Motion has been made and seconded, any discussion? All those in favor? Oh we need a roll call vote, excuse me.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:11:39 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Mr. Williams? Aye. Ms. Hartman? Aye Mr. Adam?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:11:42 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:11:44 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Mr. Lavinino?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 7Proposed2:11:45 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:11:47 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Chair Hart?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:11:48 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:11:48 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Motion passes unanimously

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:11:49 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Thank you very much let's take a 10 minute break and come back at 1120 Chair Hart Yes Supervisor Lavinino

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:11:59 · ≈ 11:11 AM

Thank you. Just a question on agenda management. Do you have, we're just trying to figure out when we're going to be breaking for lunch and I just needed to know what your idea was on the agenda?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:12:11 · ≈ 11:12 AM

I think that we have a number of items that staff is not going to do a presentation on and it will only be as long as folks have questions for so we should be able to break around noon I think.

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:12:26 · ≈ 11:12 AM

Okay thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:12:38 · ≈ 11:12 AM

Chair, just for agenda management also I think this will be a short session over lunch. 30 minutes

CommentMark SchatilloProposed2:12:43 · ≈ 11:12 AM

or so?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:12:43 · ≈ 11:12 AM

Perfect.

2:14 – 2:151 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:14:21 · ≈ 11:14 AM

Hello. Yeah.

2:21 – 2:262 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed2:21:20 · ≈ 11:21 AM

you Welcome.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:24:25 · ≈ 11:24 AM

You. Hello, everyone.

2:28 – 2:3017 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:28:45 · ≈ 11:28 AM

We'll reconvene the Board of Supervisors meeting and

the next item is Department Item 2. Will the clerk please read that item into the record?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:28:54 · ≈ 11:28 AM

Chair Hart, members of the board, departmental item number two is from public health. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding an ordinance increasing emergency medical services EMS agency fees for emergency medical technician EMT certification, EMT recertification, and paramedic accreditation.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:29:13 · ≈ 11:29 AM

Dr. De Renoso or Mr. Clay?

CommentSanta BarbaraProposed2:29:16 · ≈ 11:29 AM

Yes, so we are here available if you have any questions but I want to note that it's been 10 years since we came forth with an increase in the EMS agency fees for EMT certification, recertification and paramedic accreditation. So it's been ten years since we've looked at this. With that, we are available if you have any questions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:29:43 · ≈ 11:29 AM

Thank you. Are there questions for staff? Are there any requests to speak on this item?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:29:52 · ≈ 11:29 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, we have no requests to speak on this item.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:29:56 · ≈ 11:29 AM

OK. Is there a motion? So moved. Motion's been made. Seconded. And seconded. Any discussion? All those actually roll call please.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:30:09 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Yes, and Chair Hart, members of the board if I could just confirm That is a motion to approve staff recommendations A through D. That's right. Great, thank you. Mr. Williams? Aye. Ms. Hartman? Aye. Mr. Adam?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:30:22 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:30:23 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Mr. Lavinino?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:30:25 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:30:26 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Chair Hart?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:30:27 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:30:27 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Motion passes unanimously

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:30:29 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Next item is department item three would the clerk please read that item into the record

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:30:33 · ≈ 11:30 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, departmental item number three is from community services. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding approval of the Santa Barbara County Home Investment Partnership home consortium and Community Development Block Grant CDBG urban county 2020-2025 consolidated plan analysis of impediments to fair housing choice AI and fiscal year 2020 to 2021 annual action plan.

2:31 – 2:3321 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:31:08 · ≈ 11:31 AM

Welcome Mr. Chaption, Mr. Tiber.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed2:31:22 · ≈ 11:31 AM

Thank you Chair Hart. I'm not sure we're presenting but this is the annual of the five-year annual plan or five year consolidated plan for your review and approval. I have Ted here, Ted Tiber and Lori Baker who can answer any questions you may have.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:31:38 · ≈ 11:31 AM

Are there questions

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed2:31:38 · ≈ 11:31 AM

from the board?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:31:42 · ≈ 11:31 AM

Supervisor

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:31:42 · ≈ 11:31 AM

Williams. So, there's a couple different elements to this. One is the plan which will continue to have formation and you've given us the list of priorities. And then in addition to the plan, there is this immediate funding recommendations on table three. Is that correct? Am I understanding this staff correctly? Yes, there are some

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed2:32:03 · ≈ 11:32 AM

CDBG funding recommendations.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:32:05 · ≈ 11:32 AM

And then table four is the capital funding recommendation. So tables three and four are sort of the now, and then the priorities for the plan is the priorities for the long term formation of the plan. And I very much agree with housing being At least the first listed, and I assume that first priority of the plan. And I just think we cannot overstate the need not only for formerly homeless individuals but obviously that's a target population. But for aged out foster youth which is unfortunately our largest recruitment ground into new homelessness. So housing for aged out foster youth in many ways could prevent 60 years of homelessness.

While if we house other homeless, we might be only preventing 20 years of homelessness. I mean so it's really to me it's an emerging need and I want to put that out there and really appreciate your work.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:33:18 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Thank you Supervisor Williams. Any other comments or questions from board members? Are there any requests to speak on this item?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:33:27 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, we have no request to speak on this item.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:33:31 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Is there a motion? Move staff recommendation.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:33:35 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Second.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:33:36 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Motion's been made in second. Any discussion? Roll call please.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:33:42 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Mr. Williams? Aye. Ms. Hartman? Aye. Mr Adam?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:33:46 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:33:47 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Mr Lavinino?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:33:49 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:33:50 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Chair Hart?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:33:51 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:33:51 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Motion passes unanimously

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:33:53 · ≈ 11:33 AM

Thank you both for being here. Next item is Department Item 4. Would the clerk please read that item into the record?

2:34 – 2:3826 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:34:02 · ≈ 11:34 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, departmental item number four is from Community Services. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the approval of fiscal year 2019-2020 action plan substantial amendment and authorization of execution of loan documents and agreements for projects included in the 2019-2020 action plan substantial amendment.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 16Proposed2:34:24 · ≈ 11:34 AM

Mr. Chaption, welcome back again. Thank you again. These are CDBG funds. We have some capital projects listed on the second page of the report and it's about $1.2 million of funding that we are allocating to the community. I'll let Ted talk if you have any questions but-

not transcribed≈7s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:34:51 · ≈ 11:34 AM

Just one second, we need you to mic on the microphone. Thank you. Excuse me.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed2:34:55 · ≈ 11:34 AM

These are just prior year 2019 funds that are going towards projects either existing projects with an amendment or new projects and since we have these monies from HUD now these projects as soon as we execute these agreements can move forward and start expending these CDBG funds.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:35:12 · ≈ 11:35 AM

And

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 17Proposed2:35:12 · ≈ 11:35 AM

they're all

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:35:12 · ≈ 11:35 AM

capital. Thank You Mr. Tiber any questions of staff? Is there any public comment on this item?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:35:19 · ≈ 11:35 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, I have one request to speak by phone. And that is Jessica Wishan.

PresenterJessica WishanHabitat for Humanity of Southern Santa Barbara County I'm here today to talk aboProposedself-stated2:35:34 · ≈ 11:35 AM

Good morning and thank you for your support. My name is Jessica Wishan, CEO of Habitat for Humanity of Southern Santa Barbara County I'm here today to talk about our home repair program which is critical to health, safety and an individual's ability to age in their home also known as aging in place especially during this time of the health pandemic. We as a community must not only build new affordable housing but we must preserve what we do have so I wanted to share with you the statistics of community members we've already served so you can understand the need 65 is the average age and $23,000 a year is the average income.

Many times Habitat's preventing what could otherwise become homelessness when people are real estate rich yet cash poor. A home repair is typically a one-time investment with a lasting impact rather than a recurring subsidy. We also teach people how to take care of their own homes aiding in self sufficiency It is important to keep someone in the affordable home that they do have, otherwise we as a community lose that home as affordable within our community's housing inventory.

And at Habitat, we have strength at leveraging the dollar with the support of private dollars, government funding, volunteers and partnerships, in-kind donations and home improvement items from The ReStore. We are appreciative of your support of our item today and we're eager to talk more about this community need that is really not highlighted nearly enough when considering the full continuum of needs around affordable housing and health care here in Santa Barbara. Thank you again, and I'm available to answer any questions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:37:21 · ≈ 11:37 AM

Thank you very much for all the important work that you are doing with Habitat for Humanity in our community. You're exactly right, we can't highlight this need and issue enough but we really appreciate your partnership with the county and the great work you're doing for folks who need housing assistance. Any other questions or staff comments? Is there a motion?

Move approval.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.862:37:49 · ≈ 11:37 AM

Second.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:37:51 · ≈ 11:37 AM

Motion has been made and seconded. Roll call, please?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:37:55 · ≈ 11:37 AM

Yes, Chair Hart and members of the board. And that is approving staff recommendations A through I believe that is H.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:38:03 · ≈ 11:38 AM

It's

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:38:04 · ≈ 11:38 AM

yeah, A through

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:38:05 · ≈ 11:38 AM

H.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:38:05 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Perfect thank you. Mr. Williams?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:38:08 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Aye.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:38:08 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Ms. Hartman? Aye Mr. Adam?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:38:12 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:38:13 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Mr. Lavinino?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:38:15 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:38:15 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Chair Hart?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:38:16 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:38:17 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Motion passes unanimously

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:38:19 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Next item is department item number five. Would you clerk please read that item into the record?

2:38 – 2:4125 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:38:24 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, departmental item number five is from Public Works. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding an ordinance amending speed limits on various roads effective 30 days after adoption. And this is in the first, third and fourth districts.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed2:38:40 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Mr. McLaughlin? Yes, good morning Mr. Chair and board members and this is the first of two items from Public Works this morning and as the clerk mentioned this is just one of our routine items to amend speeds on various roads around the county and we are available for any questions you may have.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:38:56 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Thank you very

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed2:38:56 · ≈ 11:38 AM

much.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:38:57 · ≈ 11:38 AM

Are there questions for Mr. McLaughlin or his team? Supervisor Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.862:39:03 · ≈ 11:39 AM

Thank you. At the state level, there was an effort afoot to change how speed limits are set. Have you tracked that? Do you know any more about it?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:39:15 · ≈ 11:39 AM

Mr. Smart.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed2:39:17 · ≈ 11:39 AM

Mr. Chairman, Supervisor Hartman. There is a effort going on at the state level. They created a committee to study the issue, and they released a report in January. That was the last I've heard of the progress on that matter though.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.862:39:37 · ≈ 11:39 AM

Did the report have recommendations? And where would we look at that?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 18Proposed2:39:43 · ≈ 11:39 AM

I will have to get you that information.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed2:39:49 · ≈ 11:39 AM

Supervisor Williams.

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:39:50 · ≈ 11:39 AM

I would love that information because it is something that is obviously frustrating for the 85th percentile as something that's enormously frustrating for constituents as it is. To me. But given that constraint, I feel that the department in these efforts has been sensitive to community need and would move approval of items A through C.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:40:24 · ≈ 11:40 AM

Motion's been made. Do we have any public comment on this item?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:40:29 · ≈ 11:40 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, we have no request to speak on

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:40:31 · ≈ 11:40 AM

this

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:40:33 · ≈ 11:40 AM

item.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:40:34 · ≈ 11:40 AM

Motion has been made and seconded. Roll call please.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:40:38 · ≈ 11:40 AM

Mr. Williams? Aye. Ms. Hartman? Aye Mr. Adam?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed2:40:42 · ≈ 11:40 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:40:43 · ≈ 11:40 AM

Mr. Lavinino?

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:40:49 · ≈ 11:40 AM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:40:52 · ≈ 11:40 AM

Chair Hart? Aye Motion passes unanimously

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:40:55 · ≈ 11:40 AM

You had me on pins and needles there, Steve. I don't know whether you'd be

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:41:00 · ≈ 11:41 AM

there with us.

The next item is Department Item Number 6. Would the clerk please read that item into the record?

2:41 – 2:4629 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:41:07 · ≈ 11:41 AM

Chair Hart and members of the board, departmental item number six is from Public Works. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding establishing benefit assessments for county service areas 331 and the Santa Barbara North County Lighting District for fiscal year 2020 through 2021. And this is in the second third and fourth districts.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 6Proposed2:41:27 · ≈ 11:41 AM

Mr. Galpin? Yes, Mr. Chair, Board Members, good morning again. We are proposing no changes for the CSAs this year like we have for the past few years. We're available for questions and our Utilities Manager Marty Wilder is up in the Veterinary Government Center as well so thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:41:43 · ≈ 11:41 AM

Thank you, Mr. Galpin. Any questions for staff? Any requests to speak on this item?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:41:53 · ≈ 11:41 AM

Chair Hurte and members of the board, we have no request to speak on this item.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:41:56 · ≈ 11:41 AM

Is there a motion?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.862:42:02 · ≈ 11:42 AM

I would move staff recommendation A and B.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:42:06 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Motion's been made, is there a second? Second. And seconded, any discussion? Roll call please.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:42:13 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Chair Hart, members of the board just for clarification was that motion to approve staff recommendations A through E? Yes. Thank you. Mr. Williams?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:42:24 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Aye.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:42:25 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Ms. Hartman? Aye. Mr. Adam?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:42:27 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Aye Aye.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:42:31 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Chair Hart?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:42:32 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Aye.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:42:33 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Motion passes unanimously.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:42:37 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Okay, are we on to number seven? Okay.

The next item is Department Item Number Seven. Would you, would the clerk, oh I believe you have an announcement to make regarding this item Madam Clerk.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:42:50 · ≈ 11:42 AM

Yes, thank you Chair Hart and members of the board. Departmental item number seven is from planning and development. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding Santa Rita Valley Ag Inc Cannabis Cultivation Appeal Case Number 19APL32 and this is in the third district. And as noted in my announcements this morning we did receive A withdrawal, a memorandum from the Planning and Development Department requesting a withdrawal of this item to come back to the board at a later date. And I believe we have Planning and Development Director Lisa Plowman here in the audience to make any additional comments to that memorandum.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:43:31 · ≈ 11:43 AM

Ms. Plowman?

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:43:33 · ≈ 11:43 AM

Mr. Chair, members of the board, good morning. We received notification from the landowner that they had removed their authorization for this applicant to move forward with an application on the property. There seems to be a dispute over their lease. And so we wanted to withdraw the item for not too long a period of time, a relatively short period of time. See if we can get resolution. If we can get resolution and authorizations provided, we'll bring the item back for you to hear the appeal.

If they cannot come to resolution and the landowner does not authorize the applicant to move forward, we will bring forward findings for denial. Because we cannot move forward with a project where the landowner is not authorizing the use of the property in that manner.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:44:24 · ≈ 11:44 AM

Thank you, Ms. Blumen for that information. Are there any questions of staff? I have a

ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:44:28 · ≈ 11:44 AM

question Mr. Chair.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:44:29 · ≈ 11:44 AM

Supervisor Lavanina.

not transcribed≈9s of audible speech the AI couldn’t make out▸ listen
ElectedSteve LavagninoSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.802:44:31 · ≈ 11:44 AM

Thank you. I have to agree with the letter that Mr. Chatillo sent in, that I hear you saying a short amount of time. I think we should probably put a number on that. I just assume not see this thing drag out so if we can come up with a date on the calendar, I think that would be helpful. I would, well, I just think we need to hear this thing sooner rather than later. And from what I saw from the landowner he does not appear to be too interested in negotiating so I'd just as soon move this thing quick.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:45:15 · ≈ 11:45 AM

And I think we'll go and give an opportunity for the parties to comment on the withdrawal request and then consider We have a motion and a second. And

we'll move on to the next item of continuance. So do we

PresenterLinda AshSanta Rita Valley AGProposedself-stated2:45:30 · ≈ 11:45 AM

have the parties online? Yes, I'm here. My name is Linda Ash, and I'm speaking on behalf of Santa Rita Valley AG. And we just wanted to say that we concur with staff's recommendation to withdraw this item from the board supervisor's agenda and when appropriate will be noticed

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:45:54 · ≈ 11:45 AM

Thank you, Ms. Ash. Is Mr. Chatillo also on the line?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:46:03 · ≈ 11:46 AM

Chair Hart, members of the board, I do see him on the line but perhaps he is stuck at the moment. I was going to reach out to him by phone.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:46:13 · ≈ 11:46 AM

Okay we'll keep trying.

2:46 – 2:487 turns

PresenterLinda AshSanta Rita Valley AGProposedself-stated2:46:27 · ≈ 11:46 AM

Well, if I may while we're waiting. Yes. I did just want to add one other point and with respect to Mr. Shatillo's characterization that it's akin to a permit incompleteness determination I just wanted to say that, you know, we disagreed with that being the applicable rule and that the applicable rule would be found also in the LUDC under hearing procedures hearings to be continued.

And it would fall under the second section B2 that if it's going to be continued to a date or time which is not a date certain which is the case here That there was no time limitations placed under the code on how long your board could extend it. So, it wouldn't be subject to the 90-day limitation under the permit and completeness but more under the hearing procedures of the LUDC which is 35.106.110. With that said, of course I understand your board may want to place a time limitation on it. I just wanted to point out it wouldn't be under that provision that Mr. Sciatillo had cited. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:47:31 · ≈ 11:47 AM

Thank you, Ms. Ash. Mr. Gazzani did you want to comment?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:47:38 · ≈ 11:47 AM

Chair and Supervisors, I think probably the best way to think of the posture in this case right now is that for a land use permit the Board is required to make certain findings including a finding that the project complies with all applicable provisions of the Development Code. One applicable provision is that in order to be eligible to file the application in the first place it must be by the person, the landowner or with the written consent of the property owner. So if there was a dial, we would be steering the board at that finding in this case. So I don't think the board has a hard deadline for this and the distinction as a practical matter between a withdrawal and a continuance is that a continuance to a date certain would not require re-noticing and withdrawal as planning indicated in their memo does require re-noticing and the department has recommended a withdrawal.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:48:29 · ≈ 11:48 AM

Thank you. Perhaps, do we need to trail this item after closed session?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:48:38 · ≈ 11:48 AM

Chair Harden, members of the board. May I suggest we take a five or ten minute break and try and get the parties both on the line.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:48:45 · ≈ 11:48 AM

All right let's take a ten minute break.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed2:48:47 · ≈ 11:48 AM

Perfect thank you.

2:55 – 3:0011 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed2:55:36 · ≈ 11:55 AM

Hi.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 4Proposed2:58:02 · ≈ 11:58 AM

All right, we'll

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:58:10 · ≈ 11:58 AM

reconvene the Board of Supervisors meeting. We are on departmental item seven, excuse me and I think we will have to reset the clock unfortunately. Mr. Chatillo are you here and back?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed2:58:23 · ≈ 11:58 AM

I am

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:58:24 · ≈ 11:58 AM

OK, thank you. We'll have Miss Plowman. I'm sorry we Mr. Stilla didn't hear our introductory remarks the first time so we will have to replay them for his benefit is Plowman. Could you set the stage

UnidentifiedClerk of the BoardProposed · by role2:58:36 · ≈ 11:58 AM

sure? Mr Chair members of the board we received notice last late last week that the landowner had withdrawn their authorization for this applicant to move forward with a development On the property. And as a result, we have requested that this item be withdrawn from the board's agenda today. We understand that there are some questions about the lease agreement and some negotiations that are going on between the landowner and the applicant. We wanted to provide some time for that to be worked out.

If that cannot be worked out, we would bring back findings for denial to the board. My expectation is that we would try and return within 30 to 45 days. It really depends on the motion that we bring back. We will need more time on the agenda if the item and the appeal are going forward as it is scheduled today. And less time likely if we're going forward with findings for denial. So I'm giving the applicants a bit of time to sort things out. And if they can't, we will come back with findings for denial.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:59:42 · ≈ 11:59 AM

Thank you Ms. Plowman. Mr. Guzzoni did you want to add anything else?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:59:46 · ≈ 11:59 AM

Chair and Supervisors just since it's not clear what portion Mr. Chitillo was available for- I

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed2:59:51 · ≈ 11:59 AM

don't think he heard or wasn't prepared for any of our conversation

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed2:59:55 · ≈ 11:59 AM

previously. I'll just repeat my comment that followed Miss Ash on behalf I would like to make a motion on behalf of the landowner and that is, or on behalf of Santa Rita. And that is that although there's been back and forth on the timing of this, my recommendation as the board does not face a timing cutoff. That really what we're looking at is the boards ability to make findings for land use permit including conformity with all applicable provisions of the land use code. One of the provisions is that an application is not eligible for It's a pretty straightforward process. You can file a written consent without being filed by the owner of the property or by person with written consent of the property owners. So it's actually fairly straightforward with no hard clock on it.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:00:38 · ≈ 12:00 PM

Thank you, Mister is ash. Would you mind repeating your previous comments?

3:00 – 3:0510 turns

PresenterLinda AshSanta Rita Valley AGProposedself-stated3:00:58 · ≈ 12:00 PM

Take two. So once again, my name is Linda Ash. I'm speaking on behalf of Santa Rita Valley Ag and I was pointing out initially that Santa Rita Valley Ag concurs with staff's recommendation to withdraw this item from the Board of Supervisors hearing agenda and when appropriate staff will re-notice and place the item on future Board of Supervisors agenda. My second point was that I disagreed with Mr. Shatillo's characterization, that this was tantamount to a permanent incompleteness determination.

Rather we assert that this falls under the LUDC's provisions for hearing procedures section 35.106.110 and that section places no limitations on time extensions of land use hearings and subsection B specifically adjusts as hearings may be continued The first one addresses a type of continuance in which the hearing is set for a date certain, which this is not. And the second B2 is if an announcement to have a continued date time and place is not given notice of further hearings shall be provided in compliance with the chapter, which is the way that staff has teed this up. It is being characterized as a withdrawal of the application from the board's agenda to be re-agendized later.

And at that time, as was pointed out by someone in staff, of course it will be subject to full notice requirements. And the point being that neither one of those provisions in B1 or 2 place any time limitations on your board and their broad authority to extend land use hearings. So that was our position, and then to comment on some of the supervisor's concerns about this continuing on indefinitely, of course we would concur with any limitation that your board placed on the permit but we would urge as much time as possible considering The first we heard about the revocation of these, the agency and the authorization was yesterday. Mr.

Stirpa had never provided that notice to anybody at Santa Rita Valley Ag. Obviously there's a lot of legal issues that are going to be going on between Santa Rita Valley Ag and Mr. Stirpa and we need some time to sort that out as well as negotiate Hopefully, and get past where we are with Mr. Strickland and secure the agent authorizations and everything we need to move forward with our project.

So that would be a request as long as possible. Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:03:29 · ≈ 12:03 PM

Thank you, Ms. Ash. Mr. Shatila, are you prepared now?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed3:03:33 · ≈ 12:03 PM

I am, Mr. Chair and members of the board. My apologies and thank you for the accommodation to allow me to participate in the hearing. Could you get closer to the microphone, Mr

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:03:41 · ≈ 12:03 PM

Shatila?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 19Proposed3:03:43 · ≈ 12:03 PM

I can. I thank you for the accommodation for the hearing today. On appeal, this raises fundamental issues as to the validity of the application. We of course prefer that your board would consider a denial today but we understand the situation that the applicant is in and we think it is fair That they be given an opportunity to attempt to cure this defect in their application. The absence of an indemnification and authorized agent, and even a lease to be able to work and use this property.

But we don't think that should be open-ended. And we did point to the authority that we felt was generally applicable, we didn't contend it's binding but it provides some guidelines for an incomplete application and the authority for your director to deem the application expired However, I support Director Plowman's comments and suggestion that the applicant should have a 30 to 45 day period. Well, the board should prepare this for findings for denial and within a 30 to 45 day period bring this back for the purposes of denial just out of fairness to the appellant, to the surrounding community and to your staff So, Mr. Chair and members of the board thanks for considering our views here and we hope that this provides an opportunity to put a punctuation mark on this application and we can move on to more appropriate projects in more appropriate locations for this industry.

Thank you.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:05:30 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Thank You Mr. Chattillo. Madam Clerk are there any requests to speak from the public on the withdrawal request?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:05:37 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Chair Hart and members of the board, we have no request to speak from the public on the withdrawal itself.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:05:44 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Are there questions or comments from the Board? Supervisor

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:05:46 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Hartman.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.863:05:48 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Mr. Gazzone, so can the Board set 30-45 days? Do we have that discretion?

3:05 – 3:0819 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed3:05:59 · ≈ 12:05 PM

Chair and Supervisors, really in our code and procedures and in our practices we're distinguishing between a continuance with the date certain and a withdrawal that's generally pretty open-ended but the board could certainly accept the recommendation that this item is withdrawled and then simply ask planning to return with target 30 to 45 days. And maybe with some soft language in there that if it takes a few days longer that would be okay.

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.863:06:30 · ≈ 12:06 PM

And if I may, that would be my preference. The people in the community are following this very closely and they've gotten all geared up and then it didn't happen. They've gotten all geared up again and it didn't happen so I think it is good government just to give people a sense of what the framework is so that it doesn't you know they don't have to keep following this. They aren't all getting noticed so that would be my strong preference.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:06:56 · ≈ 12:06 PM

Would you like to make a motion?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.863:07:00 · ≈ 12:07 PM

So I'm moving that we allow the withdrawal, but recommend that if they're coming back do it within 30 to 45 days.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed3:07:12 · ≈ 12:07 PM

And Chair, if I could just bootstrap on there that the recommendations from the department were to that the board withdraw department agenda item seven from the agenda determined that this action is exempt from CEQA. Waive the general six-day posting requirement and I think I'm hearing Supervisor Hartman also encourage the department to try and return within did you say 30 days?

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.863:07:33 · ≈ 12:07 PM

30 to

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed3:07:34 · ≈ 12:07 PM

45. 40

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.863:07:35 · ≈ 12:07 PM

to 45

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed3:07:35 · ≈ 12:07 PM

days now provide them with some scheduling latitude of other items land on their head

ElectedJoan HartmannSupervisorProposedvoiceprint 0.863:07:40 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Thank you for clarifying my motion.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:07:42 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Thank you for making the motion. Is there a second to the motion? I'll second that. Supervisor Lavanino, seconded the motion. Any discussion of the motion? Let's do a roll call then.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:07:52 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Mr. Williams? Aye. Ms. Hartman? Aye. Mr Adam?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:07:57 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:07:58 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Mr Lavanino?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:07:59 · ≈ 12:07 PM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:08:01 · ≈ 12:08 PM

Chair Hart?

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:08:02 · ≈ 12:08 PM

Aye

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 3Proposed3:08:02 · ≈ 12:08 PM

Motion passes unanimously.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:08:04 · ≈ 12:08 PM

Thank you. We will now recess to closed session. County Council could you please read the items for consideration

3:08 – 3:163 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed3:08:10 · ≈ 12:08 PM

Chair and supervisors, today in closed session the board has agendized for one matter of existing litigation. And that is Keller versus County of Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara Superior Court case number 15CV03102. I estimate closed session at about 30 minutes.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:08:26 · ≈ 12:08 PM

Okay we'll reconvene then at 1245

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed3:11:21 · ≈ 12:11 PM

you Hi. Hello.

3:16 – 3:371 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:16:50 · ≈ 12:16 PM

. . Yeah. Music playing you Hi. Hello. Yeah. Music playing

3:44 – 3:512 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 15Proposed3:44:42 · ≈ 12:44 PM

you Hi, everyone.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:49:24 · ≈ 12:49 PM

Hello, everyone. In the Board of Supervisors meeting, Mr. Gazzani would you please report out from closed session?

3:51 – 3:512 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 12Proposed3:51:20 · ≈ 12:51 PM

Chair and supervisors today in closed session the board considered one matter of existing litigation, Keller versus County of Santa Barbara which is a Santa Barbara Superior Court case and there are no reportable actions.

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 2Proposed3:51:31 · ≈ 12:51 PM

Thank You Mr. Gazzani we are adjourned until next week May 12th

3:53 – 3:531 turns

UnidentifiedUnidentified speaker 1Proposed3:53:40 · ≈ 12:53 PM

Yeah.